LDS Church responds to priesthood meeting request by activists

To the Ordain Women Representatives-YOU DO NOT REPRESENT ALL WOMEN OF THE LDS
CHURCH. So quit assuming so much. Go start your own church and continue to
receive your own revelation, it seems to work for you. It seems like you have a
handy side business selling jewelry too. That will help fund your endeavors.
Also, nice try building a website to mimic the feeling of LDS websites. It is a
attempt to align your thoughts with mainstream LDS.

One AmericanWest Jordan, UT

March 17, 2014 12:59 p.m.

To Kate Kelly and followers,

Why set your sites so low. Why not just
demand that you all be ordained Prophets and Apostles... Go for the gold!!! (To
be read with much sarcasm...)

i am meHesperia, CA

Nov. 21, 2013 12:39 p.m.

I don't really understand the "ordain women" stance. It is hard for
me to comprehend why these women feel unequal to men because they have the
priesthood and we as women do not. I have never felt that way, nor have I felt
that my access to the power of the priesthood is in any way limited because I am
a women. Putting that aside, I also do not understand the manner in which these
women are petitioning for what they want. It is so public. It seems much more
similar to a worldly political petition than a humble petition to a loving
Father in Heaven. I have learned that when I have questions or desires I want to
express to my Father, getting on my knees, studying the scriptures, pondering,
and asking leaders questions in private is a much more effective way to appeal
to God. God's ways are not men's ways.

MercyNLovelieUSA, CA

Nov. 3, 2013 8:53 a.m.

This thread is old and there are over 17 pages of comments, but maybe this will
help someone in some way? In my experience - as a victim of a male
"priesthood" holder - it made all the difference what the male
priesthood leaders said and did - not the female leadership. The perpetrator had
no respect for women, so if you think female "priesthood" would have
worked him to repentance, think again. And my question - as a victim - was, ARE
there any righteous priesthood men? Yes - the perpetrator was punished and
reported to police by them! I had the reassurance that I needed. So sorry
sisters, but holding the priesthood won't make bad men respect you - good
men will whether you hold the priesthood or not. I know the Lord's way is
for women and men to be co-dependent; we serve each other in unique ways.
It's the world saying we aren't equal just because of priesthood
ordination - or that women's accomplishments aren't good enough unless
they copy everything men do... or that motherhood is somehow "inferior"
to priesthood. Those messages aren't from the Lord. Some responsibilities
are unique to us and us alone.

brightnessTaylorsville, UT

Nov. 2, 2013 6:46 p.m.

If it weren't for women, we would not be here. It seems that there is fear
in letting women attend, it could be that they may take over the church
priesthood. God has instructed them to take this journey to be included or
participate in the priesthood, but God on their side does not approve. Whose god
incorrect? I am confused.

frugalflyPULLMAN, WA

Nov. 2, 2013 9:19 a.m.

She can just go to any stake center and watch it or watch it on the internet or
even in her own basement.

Mushicincinnati, OH

Oct. 31, 2013 6:14 a.m.

Could the Lord one day give the PH to women? Sure, why not, he's God he can
do what he wants. He hasn't done that in the 6000+ years this earth has
been around but who says that couldn't change. I personally don't
think he will because as has been said women are NEEDED in the home. And men as
well IMA but women do have, in general (not always) an ability to nurture
children that I myself and most men, I believe, just lack. For example, my son
scrapes his knee and I say oh it's ok, it's not really bleeding. My
wife runs to his aid giving him a hug and a band aid. I'm thankful for the
different abilities that men and women have.

grandmagreatLake Havasu City, AZ

Oct. 30, 2013 10:53 a.m.

I am an older woman, and I have been a member of the LDS Church since I was 8.
I think that the majority of my Sisters in the gospel will agree with me that we
have plenty of opportunities to serve, without holding the priesthood. We can
be teachers, Primary, YW, and Relief Society presidents or counselors. We can
Teach in these same organizations, to both young women and young men. Does that
group really want the responsibility of holding the priesthood, or are they just
wanting attention. I have personally held positions in all of these
organizations, I have prayed in Sacrament meeting, and given talks there, I
enjoy the blessings of the priesthood through my Husband, sons, grandsons, and
great grandsons. I do not need to be have to be responsible for holding the
priesthood. Sisters I will pray for you.

suzyk#1Mount Pleasant, UT

Oct. 17, 2013 1:19 p.m.

If the Lord thought it necessary that women become priesthood holders it would
be that way - But It Is Not!!! Satan has a hold on these confused women.
It's unfortunate they can't see the light on this issue.

WRKRiverton, UT

Oct. 17, 2013 11:40 a.m.

Thank you KonaGirl45.

KonaGirl45St. George, UT

Oct. 17, 2013 10:43 a.m.

Although I am intrigued by the OrdainWomen movement, I cannot support it. IMHO
any woman that would demand ordination doesn't truly understand the gospel.

gramssmall town, UT

Oct. 7, 2013 1:07 p.m.

If these women were truly actively living the gospel they would be too busy to
find discontent.And they would know the reasons that we have different callings.
They would be thankful that the men do hold the Priesthood. Sad,sad, sad.

RBBSandy, UT

Oct. 7, 2013 8:12 a.m.

Dasha- Never let facts get in the way of your opinion. About half the ushers
at priesthood session were women. Stop listening to the propaganda and start
listening to the prophet.

Old RMMesa, AZ

Oct. 6, 2013 5:33 p.m.

It is a shame that there are women in the Church of Jesus Christ of Latterday
Saints whose testimonies aren't strong enough to accept and love their
roles and let our men have the same privilege. Some things just don't make
sense. Do they want the Relief Society meeting to be made up of men and
Priesthood meeting to be made up of women, then they will have a smile on their
faces. Or have some women been overlooked for a calling they wanted?

DSBCedar Hills, UT

Oct. 6, 2013 9:08 a.m.

@paul the morman - maybe what you see as "capitulation" is actually
small advancements of more Christlike practices. What is sacred about using
husbands' last names in sustainings? If that was so important to God, why
didn't He cause ancient people to adopt last names at all? Maybe God
doesn't even care about how mortals choose to utilize a naming system. Use
maiden names or not - what difference does it make?

As a new
counselor in a bishopric 20 years ago I was told by the Bishop's wife that
I should not call on women to give opening prayers in sacrament meeting.
Despite having been raised in a faithful family where my own father was Bishop
for most of my formative years, I had never heard of this policy, and wondered
why anyone would think a female was less able to invoke the Holy Spirit and
properly open a sacrament meeting. How in the world is that a priesthood
function, and where is the scriptural justification? I told her it was this
kind of unsupportable practice that helped perpetuate the idea that we are a
chauvinistic church.

You see it as capitulation. I see it as growing
up.

gburns52Milford, UT

Oct. 6, 2013 8:28 a.m.

The problem I see with this movement is that the church has a defined system in
place to petition the prophet and they are trying to bypass it and petition the
will of men by going to the press. See Matthew 6. It really has nothing to do
with what they are asking. If they were acting with real faith, and believed
that God wanted them to have the priesthood, all they would need to do would be
to ask Him in prayer and He would tell His prophet to make it so. Amos 3:7
Now, as far as the question on women getting the priesthood, anyone that
has gone through the temple should already know the answer to that.

chubbeehubbeeKanab, UT

Oct. 5, 2013 11:00 p.m.

I'm not concerned about Ms. Kelly asking priesthood leaders to consider
extending the Priesthood to women. I, for example, have asked my local
priesthood leaders to speak more on issues like religious tolerance and bigotry.
I recognize that they are the ones empowered to consider my request and, as
appropriate, ask for divine inspiration. The bigger concern is that she is
organizing protests and speaking publicly about what should be a private
spiritual issue. If her intent is to rouse rouse public sentiment in support of
her issue, then I believe her action might be inappropriate. From my
perspective though, I really don't care. The decision isn't mine, nor
is it hers and all will be well regardless of what she or I think.

paul the mormanslc, UT

Oct. 5, 2013 9:48 p.m.

This is why the US government never pays ransoms to terrorists and international
kidnappers.If you pay them once they keep coming back.These
feminists have (and other enemies of the church) have learned that the church
will give in if they are LOUD enough. It happened 6 months ago with sustainings
with women's maiden-names and opening prayer. It will continue to happen
each time the church capitulates.

Surf is UpMiami, FL

Oct. 5, 2013 9:09 p.m.

If these women see the church as a club and the priesthood as a ranking to
aspire to; and that the prophet and apostles can be bullied or guilted into
trying talk the Lord God Almighty into changing His plan then these women had
best find a new faith that yields to such pressures.

There are plenty
out there.

John AdamsPalmetto Bay, FL

Oct. 5, 2013 5:54 p.m.

@ DCTIdaho Falls, ID

With all due respect, I suggest you go
back to your LDS history and re-read what the Quorum of the Anointed was and
what its function was.

Also, if you insist that women were given the
Melchizedek priesthood, I would be most appreciative if you would provide the
source for that alleged fact.

Thank you!

paul the mormanslc, UT

Oct. 5, 2013 4:56 p.m.

Feminist revelation based change. Who is leading the church?

DCTIdaho Falls, ID

Oct. 5, 2013 12:43 a.m.

The thing about this is, when I asked a bishop about this very subject of
priesthood and why the women weren't given it, this Bishop told me that it
was because they already have the priesthood. I thought that was interesting
since the women aren't given priesthood duties as I believe they should.I pondered on this and researched church history and found out that the Bishop
was right in this regard. When Joseph Smith Jr started the church, he not only
ordained women into the priesthood, he also ordained them into the Melchizedek
priesthood. These ordinations were never removed and in fact women still receive
the Melchizedek priesthood when they become temple worthy. It was Emma Smith
that became the first female priesthood holder. The Quorum of the Anointed was
then formed with both Men and Women as equal holders of the priesthood.Slowly the Mormon men in leadership started minimizing what women were allowed
to do in exercising their priesthood gifts.And as the male priesthood
holders are reminded and admonished to use their priesthood in service, so
should the women be allowed to too.

WoodyffMapleton, UT

Sept. 30, 2013 6:33 p.m.

@Brahmabull individuals do NOT receive revelation for the Church.

WoodyffMapleton, UT

Sept. 30, 2013 6:30 p.m.

It is my belief (and I am a convert of 36 years) that there is a lack of
understanding of the Gospel by these activists. They need to study the
scriptures and be converted to the Gospel. Again, my opinion, that many born
into the Church lack a conversion to the Gospel. There is alos a complete
misunderstanding of what occurs in a Priesthood meeting. Read your scripture,
repent, and gain a testimony. Like has been said above, if you want to hold the
Priesthood, then join the RLDS, which I believe in now the Community of Christ
church?

agentbb007Lehi, UT

Sept. 29, 2013 10:35 p.m.

Wow over 300 comments, well everyone definitely has an opinion on this one. You
know if these women really want to have the priesthood so bad why don't
they just go join the RLDS church?

Lord AvenueIlford, UK, 00

Sept. 29, 2013 2:14 p.m.

I live in London, England and my wife is a member of the Church of England.
Twenty years ago they introduced women priests. Since then church attendance by
men has fallen dramatically - from about 40% of the congregation to about 25%.
Why? Because males find it more difficult to access their spiritual nature, and
without male leadership a church drifts steadily towards a feminised version of
Christianity that men cannot relate to. An equivalent and opposite situation
exists in sport. Men are physically stronger and can beat women in most sports.
That is why female-only teams and races are common. If men demanded to
participate in female-only sport, women would be discouraged and female
involvement would plummet. The LDS priesthood provides a opportunity of young
men to raise themselves up. Do the protesters not see that if they achieved
their goal they would harm women, because it would become so much more difficult
to find a 'good man'.

ChuckFinleyLehi, UT

Sept. 29, 2013 9:45 a.m.

I've been looking through the scriptures to help myself get clear how I
stand on this issue. I found these references really helpful...maybe you will,
too.

3 Nephi 11:28-40

The Family: A Proclamation to the
World

D&C 3 (relevant as an example of what can happen when we
keep asking the Lord to change his mind)

3 Nephi 18:22-25

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Sept. 28, 2013 7:03 p.m.

The claim that one must have the priesthood to give a blessing of faith can only
be made without having actually read the scriptures on the gifts of the spirit
or without understanding them. Healing is a gift of the spirit. One does not
need the priesthood to have the gift of healing.

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Sept. 28, 2013 6:45 p.m.

The claims that the views of Church members were in step with national views on
gender are plainly written by someone who does not know their history.

Utah granted women the right to vote in 1870. Mormons in the state
legislature, lead by Charles W. Penrose, pushed for granting women the right to
hold office in 1880, but were opposed by the non-Mormon governor. The US
congress rescinded the right of women to vote in Utah in 1884, and the right was
not returned until 1896.

In many other ways, starting with the
founding of the relief society, the church had a radical position on women.

Giving women the endowment in the temple was radical. True, there are no
easy analogies. But loose analogies like Masonry show that in general the things
outside the church most similar were restricted to women.

While
Brigham Young Academy being coeducational at its founding was not unprecedented,
it was not until the 1960s and 1970s that the top private institutions in the US
became co-ed.

The Church's teaching on women have also always
been radical in not condemning Eve.

John Pack Lambert of MichiganYpsilanti, MI

Sept. 28, 2013 5:52 p.m.

This is the ultimate in attention grabbing showmanship. If these people wanted
to just watch priesthood meeting, they could show up at many chapels and do
so.

The article is incorrect in saying it was just broadcast to stake
centers. In my stake for years it has been broadcast to all 5 buildings that had
satellite dishes. Starting I believe 2 years ago, we have had broadcast over the
internet to our local chapel.

We do not turn anyone away. If some
women showed up, we would have neither the will nor the organization to turn
them away.

I have to say these people do not understand the nature or
order of the Church. I am also 100% convinced that the new policies on
broadcasting have nothing to do with their showmanship, and much more to do with
the concerns of men who live far from any chapels, or those who have work or
family responsibilities that make attendance hard.

32843PROVO, UT

Sept. 28, 2013 4:35 p.m.

@dasha!

It is not, and has never been, up to you to decide whether or
not a presiding Priesthood holder should be permitted to attend any function of
the Relief Society, or any other Church organized women's or young
women's conferences, as retaliation for not being able to attend the
Priesthood session of conference. That's just silly.

If
you're really that unhappy about this take it up with the Lord. If
it's the Lord's will, He'll make that known to those he has
chosen to lead His Church. If you really believe that the Lord guides His Church
through the Priesthood as it is presently constituted, and the answer is still
no, clever arguments are not going to make any difference and you only find
yourself in opposition to the Lord.

It is not, and has never been,
about whether or not Sisters should be permitted to attend the Priesthood
session. It is about whether or not you sustain and follow the Brethren and
support their decisions. Right now, you're sowing the seeds of dissension.
Does the Spirit reside in such a one who sows dissension among the Lords
Church?

LittleDrummerMan,

Sept. 28, 2013 9:56 a.m.

Why would we want another meeting? The 14th Article of Faith: We believe in
meetings, all that have been scheduled, all that are now scheduled, and we
believe that there will yet be many great and important meetings scheduled. We
have endured many meetings and hope to be able to endure all meetings. Indeed,
we may say that if there is a meeting or anything that resembles a meeting or
anything that we may possibly turn into a meeting, we seek after these things.

skepticPhoenix, AZ

Sept. 28, 2013 8:07 a.m.

Church corporations that receive American tax exception should be legally
restricted from imposing glass ceilings on women's rights and opportunities
to achieve becoming president of the corporation.

stnicollmesa, AZ

Sept. 27, 2013 9:09 p.m.

to zoar63

The women did not receive personal revelation to hold the
priesthood--that is not within their stewardship in such--would be no different
than one claiming to receive revelation on how the church should run--or who
should be the next prophet, apostle, stake president--those are not within the
stewardship of any lay member--so if one claims to receive such-he/she is being
deceived--because that is not in the order of the Lord's church

defenderTWIN FALLS, ID

Sept. 27, 2013 5:38 p.m.

@aggie1The prophet is infallible when speaking on behalf of The Lord. If
you choose to be critical you do it at your own risk. I'm not calling you
to repentance I'm just saying your position is inconsistent with some one
who has a testimony and holds a current recommend. I think what we have here
folks is someone who weak and needs a little strengthening. I wish you the best.

atl134Salt Lake City, UT

Sept. 27, 2013 4:58 p.m.

@jimhale"The giving of the priesthood is not based on ability."

Ability to answer correctly to a list of questions while being a certain
age and possessing a particular anatomical part.

The Caravan Moves OnEnid, OK

Sept. 27, 2013 4:44 p.m.

Article quote: "It is the hope of the church that the priesthood session
will strengthen the men and young men including fathers and sons, and give them
the opportunity to gather and receive instruction related to priesthood duties
and responsibilities,” church spokeswoman Ruth Todd said Tuesday in a
letter to the group, "much the same way parallel meetings are held for
sisters, such as the general Relief Society meeting. "It’s for these
reasons that tickets for the priesthood session are reserved for men and young
men and we are unable to honor your request for tickets or
admission.""

So let me get this straight....

Women
want men who are responsible, intelligent, mature and spiritually aware.

Yet, when men have an opportunity to attend a meeting that would
instruct and encourage men in such things, those same women want to push men OUT
of that meeting so THEY can attend.

Does that make sense to you?

It doesn't make sense to me, either.

Some women, and
some men, too, are likely to choose to lose their testimony over this issued.

So be it. You can't make someone stay if they don't really
want to stay...

Utes11Salt Lake City, Utah

Sept. 27, 2013 2:51 p.m.

The "Levitical Priesthood" ended when Jesus came and established the new
covenant. ALL are welcome to have a personal relationship with him. Therefore
you don't need to be married to a "priesthood holder" to enter into
the Kingdom of Heaven. Men of color used to be excluded from the
"preisthood", not allowing women is just another way that the MEN who do
hold it can "keep power". Jesus said, "Go into all the world and
preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be
saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. – Mark 16:15-16

Notice he said, "WHOEVER"....not "Men who believe"

jimhaleEugene, OR

Sept. 27, 2013 2:51 p.m.

Inviting yourself to a meeting to which you were not invited may be
"creative". It might possibly be "courageous". But it is
decidedly NOT being "faithful".

The giving of the priesthood
is not based on ability. It is simply an assignment.

Agitating for
the priesthood is like an elder inviting himself to be a high priest or a high
priest inviting himself to a meeting of the Quorum of the Twelve. It is like
demanding a voice in who is to be the gospel doctrine teacher ... or the second
counselor in the bishopric....or the president of the relief society.

When people are determined to over throw the established order of the Church,
they are no longer believing members. They no longer believe in revelation,
authority, unity of the faith, etc.

They are Latter Day Saints in
name only.

zoar63Mesa, AZ

Sept. 27, 2013 1:58 p.m.

@Brahmabull

"Maybe the women have recieved personal revelation
that they should hold the priesthood. If so, they are entitled to voice their
opinion on the matter. And to those who say just obey and don't ask
questions or question anything... that is just bad advice all around."

A man or a woman cannot receive revelation as to how the church is to be
governed only the first Presidency and the Twelve are allowed that. You can
receive personal revelation in relation to your selves and your families, Church
policy or doctrine.. no

Behold, mine house is a house of order, saith
the Lord God, and not a house of confusion.(D&C 132:8)

lqqkpocatello, ID

Sept. 27, 2013 9:54 a.m.

If Kate Kelly doesn't have enough to do, have I got a list for her!!

TruthseekerSLO, CA

Sept. 27, 2013 8:49 a.m.

re:Dennis"After 61 years in the Church I'm thinking that becoming
a Hindu makes a little more sense than listening to the constant berating of
women, non-mormons and everything else the Church judges that doesn't
follow the "plan". "

Amen!

This topic has been
extremely revealing of what lies in LDS member's hearts--and it ain't
pretty, not at all.

Brahmabullsandy, ut

Sept. 27, 2013 8:41 a.m.

Maybe the women have recieved personal revelation that they should hold the
priesthood. If so, they are entitled to voice their opinion on the matter. And
to those who say just obey and don't ask questions or question anything...
that is just bad advice all around.

FT1/SSVirginia Beach, VA

Sept. 27, 2013 6:29 a.m.

Their will always be those who will continue to follow the arm or man/woman, and
not the lord.

DennisHarwich, MA

Sept. 27, 2013 5:40 a.m.

There is no such thing as "Gods Plan". Our agency gives us the right to
do as we please and there is no plan in place that we have to live our lives and
tow the line to some "plan" that nobody every told us about. With
the exception of Hinduism ever single religion on earth was started up by a
"man". After 61 years in the Church I'm thinking that becoming a
Hindu makes a little more sense than listening to the constant berating of
women, non-mormons and everything else the Church judges that doesn't
follow the "plan". I posted earlier that a young man might need a
ride to conference but his Mom wouldn't be allowed in. It was remarked
that somebody in the Ward would take him. I grew up in an affluent ward on the
east bench and not once ever offered a ride to general priesthood meeting.
Ever.

andyrmedford, OR

Sept. 27, 2013 1:01 a.m.

I think here is a good place to paraphrase Irina Dunn's (no relation to
Paul H) famous witticism often attributed to Gloria Steinem: "A woman needs
[the priesthood] like a fish needs a bicycle."

Stable thoughtFORT MORGAN, CO

Sept. 26, 2013 6:18 p.m.

Qoute by:RanchHere, UT"The sexism on this thread is
apparent. Just wow you guys. Wow."+

Ranch.....these are the true
sexism comments, when a man cannot state a opinion in a respectful way he no
matter how it is delivered is somehow sexist.

So let me put a little
shock into this tread by saying:

This is God's order of things,
men are the patriarchs and women are the matriarchs and each when following
God's plan grow to the greatest potential and live out the purpose of their
creations. Now that is a beautiful concept.

docdagesWEST VALLEY CITY, UT

Sept. 26, 2013 5:22 p.m.

NoCoolName_Tom.

I do not think that women will ever be allowed to
receive the priesthood of God. Please read below.

Gordon B. Hinckley,
prior President of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, said:

“Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that
way. It is part of His program. Women have a very prominent place in this
Church. Men hold the priesthood offices of the Church. But women have a
tremendous place in this Church. They have their own organization. It was
started in 1842 by the Prophet Joseph Smith, called the Relief Society, because
its initial purpose was to administer help to those in need. It has grown to be,
I think, the largest women’s organization in the world... They have their
own offices, their own presidency, their own board. That reaches down to the
smallest unit of the Church everywhere in the world...

“The men
hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church the man
neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side. They are
co-equals in this life in a great enterprise.”

WastintimeLos Angeles, CA

Sept. 26, 2013 2:55 p.m.

@79UteI agree that there are two reasonable arguments for not allowing the
group of women to attend. But there are many more reasonable arguments FOR
allowing the group of women to attend the meeting. Some of them are, (1), the
content is available to everybody on a real-time basis so it seems arbitrary to
exclude certain people from attending; (2) we want to be viewed as a religion
that “all are welcome” to attend; (3) excluding the women has
greatly publicized their cause (who had even heard of their organization before
they were turned down?); (4) there is no doctrinal reason to exclude them; (5)
excluding the women creates bad PR (for very PR sensitive Church) that in the
past has excluded certain groups (e.g. Blacks) from full participation in the
gospel for reasons unknown; (6) the beautiful messages of conference might very
well be overshadowed by the hubbub surrounding excluding women from this one
televised session.

frgoughColorado Springs, CO

Sept. 26, 2013 2:42 p.m.

Ladies, if you want to exercise priesthood power, authority and ordinances, go
work in the temple.

just-a-fanBountiful, UT

Sept. 26, 2013 2:17 p.m.

I am so tired of these special interest groups whining about things. The
Priesthood is what it is and the church will never allow gay couples to be
married in the temples. People who are members of the church who harass leaders
of the church and make a mockery of their leadership should be excommunicated.

79UteOrange County, CA

Sept. 26, 2013 12:17 p.m.

dasha!

The general availability of the meetings doesn't change
the nature of the meetings. Your "logical" conclusion is a stretch.

The priesthood session of General Conference is intended for men, just
as the General Women's Meeting is intended for women. The only regular
attendance by men at the General Women's Meeting is priesthood leadership
because the women's organizations are auxiliary to the priesthood.
That's not to say that other men have never attended a women's meeting
or that women have never attended a priesthood meeting. I've seen both.

Two reasonable arguments for not allowing this group of women marching
together to attend the meeting are (i) the meeting is in fact a meeting for the
priesthood and other men and young men aged 12 and older being introduced to the
priesthood, and (ii) their purpose for trying to attend is to voice and
publicize their desire for a dramatic change in the way the Church is organized.

?SLC, UT

Sept. 26, 2013 10:27 a.m.

I have a question. In the Old Testament and at least once in the New Testament
there is mention of prophetesses. Most of these were righteous women. What
kind of role did a prophetess have? Did she operate under the authority of the
priesthood or like Relief Society under the pattern of the priesthood? If such
roles were held anciently, with the restoration of all things is it possible
such roles may come again?

Ark_HolderBarling, AR

Sept. 26, 2013 10:07 a.m.

When it comes to changing something within the church you do not need to go to
Salt Lake City to change it. Get on your knee's and talk to the leader of
the Church (GOD). IF Heavenly Father thinks it should happen he will tell his
Prophet to make it happen. I don't care if it has to do with Gay marriages
in the church or females gaining the priesthood or any other topic. Even if the
opinion of the First Presidency and the Quorum of the twelve wanted to give
females the priesthood they can't until GOD tells them too allow it. It is
not our church, it is GODS church for us.

SerenityManti, UT

Sept. 26, 2013 8:30 a.m.

I honestly don't believe these women want the priesthood as much as they
want media attention. I believe that the priesthood should be given to women
when men are given the power to give birth. That way we could have equality of
the sexes in the LDS Church. Why are these women vying for the priesthood? For
the glory it can give them of victory over men. It's like "Whatever
you can do, I can do better". It has nothing to do with the glory of God or
praising God or even being godlike. It has to do with pride and a false sense
of personal aggrandizement. These women should open their eyes and understand
their own wonderful worth in the eyes of their Creator; that it is He who has
given men and women different roles in this family we call the human race. If
they understood the sacred role they were given, they would be awed and thankful
for the privilege of being a woman.

mattwendIDAHO FALLS, ID

Sept. 26, 2013 7:56 a.m.

Perhaps women don't get the priesthood because Heavenly Father never
intended women or men to be independent of each other. A man can not get to
exaltation without hiw wife. It requires working together. In the world, more
and more women are having children on their own, providing for themselves and
honestly benefiting society. To Heavenly Father, however, what is of greatest
value is to bring souls to Christ, starting with our own families. We women can
do it all by ourselves, sort of. We can work, care for our homes, raise our
children, and we can do it pretty well without men. But it does not achieve the
ultimate goals of the gospel: learning to be a partner with someone of the
opposite gender.

Third try screen nameMapleton, UT

Sept. 26, 2013 6:30 a.m.

Once upon a time the chosen wanted a king. The prophet asked. God said no.Then they said, "All the sophisticated countries have a king." We
should have one, too. The prophet asked. God again said no.Finally, the
chosen people said, "This is getting embarrassing. We are looked upon as a
backward people because we don't have kings." The prophet asked. God
said, "Have it your way."That turned out to be a bad move.As
did the showing of the manuscript pages.Expect President Eyring to talk
about the Samuel Principle again.

sukiyhtakyus, CA

Sept. 26, 2013 1:08 a.m.

Speaking as an outsider...this is where I think the LDS will be separated into
two camps...the true believers who believe this is truly God's church that
was restored to JS as opposed to those for whom this church is merely just a
cultural activity with no real conversion to the truthfulness of this church.
If you really believe the Prophet receives revelation from God then you have to
see that agitation the Prophet or anyone else in the church for change is a
lesson in futility. If you really want change instead of showing up outside the
Priesthood meeting you should gather with your sisters and pray and petition God
for change. If change comes, then your prayers were answered. If it
doesn't come and you are a true believer then you have to accept it is His
will that you not hold the priesthood. To do otherwise would be insulting to
God to think a mere Prophet could overrule God. It really is as simple as that.

katiefrankieTualatin, OR

Sept. 26, 2013 12:35 a.m.

I have no interest in holding the priesthood. I'm in the RS presidency in
my ward and already that is more than enough work to do. Our ward cannot even
get the priesthood holders to home teach regularly (the rate at which families
are visited is below 15%), and there are so many women in the ward that are
elderly or mentally handicapped that able sisters are given 5 or 6 sisters to
visit at a time. Add to regular meetings and teaching the stewardship over
compassionate service, welfare, Mutual and Primary - since our task is to
strengthen Home AND Family - plus coordinating activities, temple worship, child
care, play groups, ward activities in tandem with the men, literacy, caring for
the missionaries, and our own families' needs, and we're wanting to
add the PRIESTHOOD'S duties as well??? You've got to be kidding me,
if only on a calendar/energy scale. (Add in the bordering-on-apostasy theme and
I don't even know what to say.)

davidmparkSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:48 p.m.

Um... it's the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints right? Well, if
they have a problem with it, bring it up with Jesus Christ - it's His
church.

Protesting to get a God to change His mind due to religious
beliefs based in progressive politics seems silly.

PopsNORTH SALT LAKE, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 7:59 p.m.

Men are required to obtain the priesthood and to magnify their callings in it in
order to receive exaltation. Women are not. I guess if I were a woman I would
count it a blessing and move on.

TruthseekerSLO, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 7:50 p.m.

""We operate on the Lord's time," she said. "We are not
demanding anything. We are respectfully requesting that the brethren petition
the Lord and ask if it is time that women are given the priesthood."

The group is asking leaders to petition the Lord, acknowledging the
change will come from God. I see no harm in raising the question.

My experience in the Church is that there no avenue for lay members to take
concerns "up the chain." It is a big problem especially when local
leaders lack proper judgement in carrying out their duties. Those who are
wronged have no recourse because attempts to go "up the chain" are
rebuffed. If leaders were more available for dialogue and addressing concerns
perhaps the Ordain Women group would've availed themselves of those
avenues.

I can imagine many benefits to women if the priesthood were
extended. It would be nice for women to be able to administer blessings to
those they visit teach, to give blessings to their children in partnership with
their husbands, or alone if no priesthood holder was in the home.

I'm guessing most LDS women have given little thought to potential
benefits.

JonathanPDXPortland, Oregon

Sept. 25, 2013 6:40 p.m.

While I can understand some people feeling "left out" because they
don't believe they have an equal share of the power or blessings or
authority in the church, we must remember that the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-Day Saints is not a democracy. Nor are its policies, ordinances or
doctrine made or swayed by public opinion, but rather revealed to the members of
that church by their Prophet, Seer and Revelator as directed by the Lord.

The decision of who is and is not to be ordained into the Melchizedek
priesthood is not up for public discussion. The belief of these women that by
appealing to a public forum the Church will change its sacred ordinances simply
demonstrates their intentions are based on nothing more than selfish desires and
not what is good for the church or the Plan of Salvation. It is for the Lord
alone to decide who will and who will not hold that holy priesthood.

americanalatina13provo, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 6:30 p.m.

Just a political stunt to try to tear at the church, nothing more.

Apostates.

stnicollmesa, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 6:19 p.m.

I would like us all to remember that the priesthood is a sacred power--Even in
discussions and opinions as being offered it should not be done so in a flippant
or casual manner-But remembering it is God' Power --And that is sacred

ForrestcGreenway, AR

Sept. 25, 2013 5:40 p.m.

Perhaps the men would like to petition for the right to bear (give birth) to
children. Now that's equality. As an LDS woman, I am quite happy with my
supporting role; I would not want to change places with a man and I don't
want the responsibility of the priesthood. I am grateful to know that Our
Father in Heaven is in charge here and we won't be bowing to political or
other pressures.

LasvegaspamHenderson, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 5:34 p.m.

John, John, John. Don't you realize that women like Kate aren't
interested in joining another church? They want their church to, how shall I
say it, enlarge the tent, so that they can remain culturally in the same
comfortable place they've always been. It's not about desiring new
revelation from God, or even about pushing the prophet to inquire of Him. They
don't really care WHAT God wants. It's all about what THEY want.

John SimpsonARLINGTON, VA

Sept. 25, 2013 4:59 p.m.

There are any number of churches where women are pastors, priests, deacons and
bishops, such as the Episcopal Church, the Unitarian-Universalist Association,
the United Church of Christ, the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ), the
United Methodist Church, the Presbyterian Church (USA), Christian Science, the
American Baptist Churches, Unity, and the Church of Religious Science. Indeed,
in the Church of Religious Science, practically the entire ministerial corps
consists of women. As a former member of one of the foregoing, I can attest
that women pastors can be lovely people, gracious and devoted to good works.
The problem is that none of these organizations, praiseworthy though they be,
possesses priesthood authority like that which Jesus conferred on his apostles.

Any woman who is uncomfortable with the male-only priesthood of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints should join one of those other
churches. Just do not be surprised at the paucity of men in the pews, or at the
shortage of manifestations of the transcendent power of God in their work.

worfMcallen, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 4:29 p.m.

For those people who do not believe in the church.

Please go
somewhere else, and quit whining.

I'm sure, there are other
things, these people want to change as well.

There are many other
churches to fill your wants.

Say No to BOMapleton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 4:20 p.m.

How about this response?President Monson gets up on Saturday afternoon,
announces the new temples, then says: "After witnessing the dedicated
service of sisters throughout the world I have spent many hours of prayer and
fasting in the upper rooms of the temple, inquiring about ordaining women to the
priesthood. The answer was no."Now THAT would be a test of faith for
this group.

USNGarySan Diego, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 4:03 p.m.

IF these women truly believe in the gospel, why on earth would they ask to go to
the priesthood session. Let them join the RLDS church, seems to fit them
better.

1aggieSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 4:00 p.m.

@defender

What part of "fallible old men" is not correct?They have openly admitted their fallibility repeatedly.They are
objectively old.And I believe they are indeed men.

In your zeal
to be a "defender" (anybody think we have an authoritarian follower
personality here?) I believe you are taking issue with indisputable facts. I
love how some people are so quick to call other people to repentance!

Cowboy DudeSAINT GEORGE, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 3:45 p.m.

As an Elder in the Priesthood I think I will petition to attend High Council
meetings. But, I don't want another meeting.

Let's face it.
There are some chauvinist Priesthood holders and there are some uppity High
Priests that don't ever want to be Elders again. Vanity is not absent in
the Priesthood, but it can be. Ordaining women will not change that.

In the end, "your calling doesn't mean the left over shot in a
shotgun" - Legrand Richards, because the last will be first and the first
will be last. Every valiant son and daughter will be welcomed to the Lord's
House.

DuckhunterHighland, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 3:40 p.m.

It's amazing to me that anyone would want to attend another meeting. We
have far to many meetings in this church, we are the meetingest bunch of people
to ever grace this planet. I've actually been to a meeting to plan another
meeting. I've been to meetings that appear to have the sole purpose of
getting me to a meeting.

Of course doctrine is doctrine and these
women are obviously at odds with Christ's doctrine, but I'm more than
happy to let them attend some of my meetings for me. I'll gladly stay home
and do almost anything else instead.

CanyontrekerTAYLORSVILLE, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 3:28 p.m.

Perhaps it's semantics, but to correct some of these comments...We have the
Priesthood, but only men are ordained to hold the Priesthood and few are called
to hold Priesthood keys.

Women have the Priesthood; but are not
ordained to hold it. Women are set-apart by the Priesthood to lead in the
Church. Women work in the temple by the Priesthood.Women are sealed to
their spouse without being ordained; however their husband must be ordained to
receive the same privilege. We could not do this if WE didn't all have the
Priesthood.

Jon1Arlington, VA

Sept. 25, 2013 3:22 p.m.

This really should be a non-issue for every member. The Church is the
Lord's church not ours to run. If he want's women in the priesthood,
he will reveal that desire through the phrophet at his own time. Until then we
members have coveneted to run the church according to the Lord's dictates.
It's as simple as that!

sharronalayton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 3:10 p.m.

@1.96 Standard Deviations ,Priesthood requirements. A bishop [or elder]
must be . . . the husband of one wife" (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6). These
passages all use the same Greek word for "man" and "husband." It
is not the generic term anthropos, from which the English word
"anthropology" derives and which refers to human beings, male or female,
without regard to gender. , Paul used the specific word aner, a term that means
a male person in distinction from a woman (cf. Acts 8:12; 1 Timothy 2:12), one
capable of being a husband (see Matthew 1:16; John 4:16; Romans 7:2; Titus 1:6).
Why did Paul prohibit women from exercising the leadership role of elder .

The husband of one wife would exclude polygamists .

birwinHerrmian, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 3:04 p.m.

Where in the scriptures does it say women cannot hold the priesthood?

Of course, I don't think there are any women priesthood holders in the
scriptures either.

Does it really matter to God who holds the
priesthood?

How would this help/hurt women in our church? How would
it help/hurt men in our church?

I hold the priesthood and I would
love the help. It seems like women get much more done in the church and take it
more seriously... Compare home teaching with visiting teaching statistics.

I am not saying it is God's will, just that I wish it were so.

?SLC, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 2:54 p.m.

Wy the need for sisters to attend priesthood meeting? If The Lord has something
specific for us as sisters in the church to know or give to us, wouldn't it
it be more applicable to share those things with us in a General Relief Society
meeting? Didn't "The Family: A Proclamation to the World" come out
in a General Relief Society conference? If The Lord were to extend the
authority of the priesthood to women, wouldn't it come through a General
Relief Society meeting?

defenderTWIN FALLS, ID

Sept. 25, 2013 2:52 p.m.

@aggie1 and anyone else who criticize those "fallible old men"Be
very very careful you are on very shaky ground especially if you claim to be a
member of the church. The scriptures are absolutely full of stories regarding
those who found themselves at odds with the Lord's prophet. This is a
top-down church. If you find yourself sympathizing with these women you need to
reevaluate your standing before God and thus his prophet.

SilverprospectorSAN ANTONIO, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 2:45 p.m.

1.96 Standard Deviations

first, yes it is worth discussing because it
appears to have happened. Peter, James and John (even though Joseph smith said
nothing about this visit for the first 5 years of the church) also didn't
tell them to go get Hyrum, Sidney, David Whitmer, or any of the others. If that
visitation of the 3 apostles really happened (doubtful) then it has nothing to
do with Joseph ordaining women later on. Unless, of course, you think all of the
testimonials and journals about women giving blessings were made up. People in
that day would have no reason to make those things up. There are numerous
accounts of it.

You mention a statement by president Hinckley.. I am
sorry to say but that was only his opinion and isn't binding. You
can't thrown in quotes by previous prophets and then disregard other
quotes.. President Hinckley also said polygamy is "not doctrinal"..
which we know it clearly was doctrinal. So his words aren't binding, only
opinion.

oldschoolerUSA, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 2:37 p.m.

i believe Miss Kelly and her followers have not been at the Temple. If they did,
they should go more often in order to understand the true order of prayer and
priesthood. Please repent beofre is too late.

MichiganderWestland, MI

Sept. 25, 2013 2:35 p.m.

There is only one church on the face of the earth who has the Priesthood
Authority after the order of the Son of God (Alma 13), and that group of people
is The Church of Jesus Christ [WHQ: Mononghela, Pennsylvania].

By the
way, we ordain women as Deaconesses according to the New Testament pattern
(Romans 16:1-2).

sharronalayton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 2:30 p.m.

RE: 1.96 Standard Deviations ,Priesthood requirements.

A bishop [or
elder] must be . . . the husband of one wife" (1 Timothy 3:2; Titus 1:6).
These passages all use the same Greek word for "man" and
"husband." It is not the generic term anthropos, from which the English
word "anthropology" derives and which refers to human beings, male or
female, without regard to gender.

Paul used the specific word aner, a
term that means a male person in distinction from a woman (cf. Acts 8:12; 1
Timothy 2:12), one capable of being a husband (see Matthew 1:16; John 4:16;
Romans 7:2; Titus 1:6). Why did Paul prohibit women from exercising the
leadership role of elder . The husband of one wife would exclude polygamists.
i.e..,

1. Justin Martyr (c.160) rebukes the Jews for allowing
polygamy: "Your imprudent and blind masters [i.e., Jewish teachers] even
until this time permit each man to have four or five wives.

2.
Irenaeus (c.180) condemns the Gnostics for, polygamy: " following upon
Basilides and Carpocrates, have introduced promiscuous intercourse and a
plurality of wives..."

Mike RichardsSouth Jordan, Utah

Sept. 25, 2013 2:24 p.m.

It seems that some people don't understand that God is the head of the
Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints. It seems that some people think
that popular opinion dictates doctrine. It seems that some people would insult
God just so that they could make a statement.

Don't they think
that God understands how to run His church?

Do they think that God
needs them to "fix" things?

No man would want to have the
responsibility of being a mother in Zion if he understood the responsibility of
being a mother in Zion. No woman would want to have the responsibility of the
the Priesthood if she understood the responsibilities of the Priesthood.

Too many people are so set on correcting God that they don't have
time to reflect on why they are here on earth or what God's plan is for
them. They seem to think that they can order God around, as if he were
subservient to them. But, as they say, pride cometh before the fall.

MugabeACWORTH, GA

Sept. 25, 2013 1:52 p.m.

Why shouldn't women be ordained to the priesthood? We are Christians,
aren't we? That is what Christians do. They ordain their women to Pastor
churches, Evangelists, Bishops, etc, etc. My cousin is a Bishop in one of the
other Christian churches.

We have chosen to be called Christians
rather than Latter Day Saints, so, we must accept all that Christianity entails.

KimberSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 1:51 p.m.

I am not really part of any religion right now, but I admire the many people
that have influenced my life and many of them have been LDS. I have very fond
memories attending events sponsored by the Relief Society with my mother. I
know that the males in my life would not have been interested in attending them,
and I was not interested in attending their meetings. I'm glad that
everyone can now listen to the male conference if they want to (and have always
been able to read it). I realize that the women mentioned just want to show
their interest in becoming ordained, but I don't think this is the right
way.

lmcWest Jordan, Utah

Sept. 25, 2013 1:47 p.m.

I've always felt that women haven't needed the priesthood. The
priesthood is given to men so they will have specific assignments to serve
others, thereby learning to give of themselves unselfishly as Our Savior
exemplified. Paul said the "natural man receiveth not the things of
God". Contrast that with what Joseph Smith told the Female Relief Society.
He said the Lord has "something better" for them "after the pattern
of the priesthood" that would allow them to "act according to their
benevolent natures, giving care to those in need". So the priesthood is
given to man to help him "put off the natural man" and the Relief
Society is given to women to help them do what comes naturally to women. I know
its simplistic, but no more so than implying women are less important because
they don't have priesthood. Maybe if the priesthood brethren used lace
tablecloths and floral centerpieces they would visit the homes of members as
well as the Relief Society sisters! Or maybe the women are just naturally more
charitable.

R JOHNSONSaint George, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 1:43 p.m.

. . . And men should petition the Prophet to see if the Lord will now allow men
to start giving birth, so that men can experience the benefits and
responsibilities of motherhood. Equality goes both ways.

The ironic
thing is, I'm betting 75% of these women won't attend or watch the
conference sessions they are allowed to attend. This isn't about getting
to view the Priesthood Session. This is about "self-esteem". If these
women were given the priesthood, it would be "amen to the the priesthood or
authority of that woman", because their priesthood would be for personal
benefit, rather than to serve other.

Cinci ManFT MITCHELL, KY

Sept. 25, 2013 1:13 p.m.

I think Ms. Kelly has clearly demonstrated what her goal is. If her energy was
spent trying to magnify her calling and her role, perhaps this would not be
necessary. She lacks confidence, knowledge, wisdom, and understanding. I
remember when President Uchdorf admonished us to "Lift where you stand".
Perhaps Ms. Kelly should listen to the prophets and she, too, could find that
she has all that is needed to bless those around her with value equal to the
blessing of the priesthood. It's not the same, but truly equal, valued,
and complete.

1.96 Standard DeviationsOREM, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 1:01 p.m.

Silverprospector-

The Lord doesn't work in obscurity. There is
no need for speculation on the matters of the priesthood for women using the
Bible or quotes from past church members. If women were to hold the priesthood
as men do, I believe it would be something already addressed by the first
presidency and the twelve long ago.

Keep in mind that John the
Baptist and Peter, James and John did not ask Joseph to go get his wife Emma
when the priesthood was restored. They didn't ask Joseph to ordain his wife
afterward as well.

Also note that President Hinckley mentioned that
"Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way."
You can see Gordon B Hinckley's entire words for yourself. The church has
an FAQ section on Mormon dot org, and under the "women" section it has
reference to why they don't hold the Priesthood. Click that and you will
see the quote from the prophet.

(I believe this quote originated
when President Hinckley was being interviewed by some well-known reporter/news
person, I can't remember who)

Nate the skateClearfield, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 1:00 p.m.

The priesthood is the authority from Jesus Christ, a man, to perform baptisms
and bestow gifts of the Holy Ghost upon members of the church. Jesus Christ
redeemed man from the fall of Adam and Eve. The woman partook of the forbidden
fruit, introduced death into the world. Most women have the ability to bring
spirits into the testing world, the first birth. Men, if they live worthily,
have the ability to bring baptism and the gift of the Holy Ghost and marriage to
all, a second birth in the Kingdom of God. Men get to experience priesthood,
women get to experience giving physical birth and nurturing.

scwozgambier, oh

Sept. 25, 2013 12:45 p.m.

Pride is an awful thing. It creates schism and opposition. If you believe,
what is being taught in the Priesthood session then you would believe the
Prophet when he speaks. If you do not believe then you do not really need to go
because it is not for you. This is all about Pride and getting your name and
face in the news. Nothing to do about sharing the words of the Lord. Christ
taught in meetings separated by sex, when it was right and taught in mixed
groups when right so whoever tries to say Christ would not want this has not
read the scriptures closely. This is a decision made by the Lord and whichever
way he tells us to do it I am glad to obey

maximumPhoenix, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 12:44 p.m.

Kate claims "Of course we believe it is God's priesthood ... If we
didn't believe that, then why bother? But we all know the priesthood has
been expanded over time. Christ expanded it to the Gentiles. In 1978 it was
expanded to all worthy males."

So if it's God's
priesthood why isn't she petitioning God himself?

How does she
know the time has come? Does she profess to know the will of Christ concerning
His Priesthood?

Does she believe Christ changes doctrine based on
public opinion? Sure sounds that way.

It didn't happen in 1978
when the Priesthood was expanded to all worth males. Criticism of the Church
for not ordaining blacks peaked in the '50s and '60s. By 1978 the
issue had pretty much died out and nobody in the realm of public opinion was
petitioning church leaders to change. The change happened when Christ wanted it
to happen, not when some of His children wanted it.

Kate sounds like
a whiny spoiled brat, nagging her baby sitter to give her something that her
parents don't want her to have and that her sitter doesn't have the
authority to give her.

BYU Track StarLos Angeles, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 12:29 p.m.

The Community of Christ (formerly the Reorganized LDS Church) allows women to
hold the Priesthood. I am sure the LDS women from the Utah Church seeking this
privilege will be initally be welcome into the C of C Church.

RedWingsCLEARFIELD, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 12:17 p.m.

Women and men have different but equal roles. This is so hard for society today
to understand. Equality does not mean being identical. My wife receives all
ofthe blessings of the priesthood through me. I only receive those blessings
because she and I are together.

I truly feel sad for Sister Kelly.
Sometimes we put our personal opinions ahead of revealed doctrine because we
want our opinion to be correct. It is a form of pride. I have caught myself
doing it, too. I believe her intentions to be noble, but scripture and doctrine
are clear on the separate but equal roles of the genders in the Church and in
the eternities.

I don't understand how anyone can object to the
Church holding a meeting for men and boys 12 and over. There is a separate
meeting for all adult women, AND one for young women 12 and over. Besides,
anyone can read everything that was said at these meetings online for free!!

MisterDivotLehi, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 12:16 p.m.

@cougarsare1 - don't know where you got the impression i'm not a
member of your church. However, I stand by what I said: women are not ordained
to the priesthood to participate in order to participate in ANY temple
ordinance. Not saying I'm opposed to such an action, but it would come
about if the Lord willed it, and not because a group petitioned for it.

@silverprospector - I agree with your response to cougarsare1

Gram CrackerPrice, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 12:14 p.m.

Oh my goodness. This makes me very sad. Men have their place. Women have their
own place also. This group of malcontents do not represent me or the large
majority of women in the church.

Philippine BonitaSammamish, WA

Sept. 25, 2013 12:09 p.m.

I don't understand how a woman who is obviously endowed (I believe the
article said she had served a mission) wants an ordination to the priesthood.
What is it that she wants to do that she can not do now? Women can call upon
the powers of heaven, women can preach, they can pray aloud in church and
everywhere else, hold several of the highest positions in the church and can do
pretty much everything men can do. There are many responsibilities carried out
in the church that REQUIRE a WOMAN and NOT a man to carry them out. The Lord
sees all these things. What is it that a woman would be seeking through
priesthood ordination that she does not already have but a TITLE which has
nothing to do with how God sees her, but with how the world sees her.

djkblue springs, MO

Sept. 25, 2013 12:05 p.m.

why are so many thinking 'secret meetings' ? it is directed towards
the priesthood holders. the women have general relief society meetings. those
whom question the gospel, meetings, leadership need to look for their testimony
and fire it up again.

noworriesArlington, VA

Sept. 25, 2013 11:36 a.m.

I'm curious to know whether there is a scripture anywhere in the standard
works that explicitly states that women will never be able to hold the
priesthood (even in eternity). If so, I want to know.

An interesting
exercise is to ask yourself how you would react if the Church changed it's
policy and allowed women to hold the priesthood. I, for one, would support our
church leaders and be grateful that the Lord is the one that has to sort out
these difficult matters and we don't have to worry.

My concern
with the activists is that there seems to be a belief that holding a priesthood
calling (such as bishop, stake president, etc.) increases ones eternal worth or
contribution to building the kingdom.We all have the same calling, men and women
alike. We are disciples of Christ.

Our universal calling is
home/visiting teaching, parenting, missionary work, family history work, temple
work, ministering, etc. Specific callings are temporary but the call to serve
God's children is eternal and neither men nor women have exclusive rights
to participation. Our concern should be our personal contribution to the
kingdom, not the calling we hold.

CA GrannyPETALUMA, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 11:28 a.m.

Whenever I read or hear of someone who doesn't think women have a
significant role in the Lord's plan of salvation unless they also have the
priesthood, I feel that they are denigrating the maternal nature and
significance of the woman's assignment to the success of the Lord's
plan. We have been given the privilege of bringing all the spirits in the
pre-existence into the world. Through the ordinances administered under the
priesthood, we are prepared for eternity. The separate roles require
cooperation of both the man and the woman and are of equal importance but they
are not intended to be the same.

zoar63Mesa, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 11:19 a.m.

@DocHolliday

"Hmmmm... Maybe you missed it. There are several
scriptural references from the old testament where women used or held the
priesthood,"

Please cite those references. If you are thinking of
Deborah she was a judge in Israel. Only the Levites were permitted to function
in the priesthood.

"But the Levites have no part among you; for
the priesthood of the Lord is their inheritance;"(JST Josh 18:7)

"All that were numbered of the Levites, which Moses and Aaron numbered at
the commandment of the LORD, throughout their families, all the males from a
month old and upward, [were] twenty and two thousand." (Num 3:39)

I do not find any mention of women being part of this census.

SilverprospectorSAN ANTONIO, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 10:45 a.m.

cougarsare1

correction: there have been several people who have
fallen away that have previously had the second endowment. so no, it isn't
guessing. There are several published stories from very credible people
including dates and the apostles that were there to perform it. There is little
disputing this fact, if you choose to debate it that is up to you. I am a
member, and you claim to be too. So nobody is trying to school you on your
religion, just give you a piece of information that you are missing.

Kjirstin YoungbergMapleton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 10:44 a.m.

Dictating anything to the apostles of God and making a spectacle for media
consumption puts light in the wrong place. Our faithful members do so much good.
It's a shame there is no room on CNN for those actions. Still, I see
opportunities for change and exploration of these avenues.

When the
Episcopal Church admitted women to the priesthood, it was more a wrinkle than a
wave. Now heads don't turn at all when liturgies are carried out there by
women rather than men. I can see a day when women will take over some of the
more tedious LDS priesthood roles, such as marriages for time, that bring the
men to tears. After all-it's not as if any of us is paid for performing
priesthood functions.

At the time of Christ, women were of less
value than the beasts. Had the priesthood been given to them then, it may have
been too revolutionary for the early church to succeed.

All in the
Lord's time, people. He directs the Prophet. If you believe that, follow
him. Force is a tool of the adversary, and accomplishes nothing.

Say No to BOMapleton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 10:43 a.m.

@2 bitsWe might have trouble calling the handbook of instructions
revelation. They don't even call the Family Proclamation a revelation.It is a policy book.And the scriptures aren't as clear as what is
called for by this group.The church as an institution doesn't like to
say "no." We've seen that displayed recently.A definitive
declaration is what's needed, but it would not sit well with the
institutional church.

cougarsare1Las Vegas, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 10:36 a.m.

@MisterDivot and Mint Julip: Okay, not an endowment. And what you are referring
to is something that anyone who has been a part would not speak of. Anyone else
is just guessing. You don't really know exactly what happens, regardless
of your "research."

I won't attempt to school you on
your religion (or non-religion) if you won't pretend to know more about
mine than I do.

Brent GarnerIdaho Falls, ID

Sept. 25, 2013 10:32 a.m.

To Sister Kelly,

Remember Sonia Johnson and her fate!

SilverprospectorSAN ANTONIO, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 10:29 a.m.

1.96 Standard Deviations

I have to respond here, as I think you are
somewhat off on what you said.

"Prophetesses in the Bible never
held Priesthood keys of authority as well"

How would you know
that? You state it as absolute fact. Even if you believe the bible doesn't
mention it, that doesn't mean it didn't happen. Try not to speak in
absolutes.

"Don't mistake the laying of hands as the
priesthood -- the women never received it then and never did priesthood
ordinances or priesthood blessings"

Again, even if you believe
that it didn't happen, despite all of the quotes and evidence for it, you
can't say for %100 that it didn't. If you look at your statement,
women were allowed to give blessings and the laying on of hands.. Well
don't you have to have the AUTHORITY to do that? What is authority??
Priesthood. If not, why don't women still give blessings today by the
laying on of hands, but without using the priesthood?

ksampowFarr West, Utah

Sept. 25, 2013 10:27 a.m.

Women expecting to be ordained to the priesthood are like men expecting to bear
children - in both cases one would be questioning God's plan. "Male
and female created He them." Distinct roles do not imply discrimination -
should men accuse the Creator of discrimination because men cannot become
pregnant? As the Bible says, "My ways are not your ways, and my thoughts
are not your thoughts. For, as high as the heavens are above the earth so are my
thoughts higher than yours, and my ways higher than your ways.”

randyclapperElyria, OH

Sept. 25, 2013 10:19 a.m.

These tactics put me in mind of Korihor. This movement is designed to be
divisive and draw souls away from the firm foundation of the gospel, IMO. Very
sad to see it.

Susan C.Orangevale, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 10:18 a.m.

Silly Kelly! For a lifelong Mormon and a returned missionary, you have a very
limited understanding of the roles of men and women. This is the Priesthood of
the Lord, not of a very small bunch of silly women who cannot seem to feel
comfortable in their gender role. My suggestion would be to buckle down and pay
a little more attention about why God assigns roles the way He does, and to
realize that women share in the priesthood much more than you realize, even
though they do not perform ordinances. Stop intellectual-izing the Gospel of
Jesus Christ, and look with your heart, will real intent...the same as you
taught on your mission. I love being a Mormon woman!

dotpPOTEAU, OK

Sept. 25, 2013 10:17 a.m.

How about we let Heavenly Father run HIS church HIS way and forget about
changing things around until HIS SPOKESPERSON (the Prophet, who at this time is
Thomas S. Monson)is told to change things BY HIM? Since that hasn't
happened yet, I am content to attend the meetings I'm supposed to attend
and let those who are ELIGIBLE hold the priesthood. I have plenty of
responsibility to satisfy me. I don't need the added responsibilities of
the Priesthood on my plate. It's already full enough with all the other
responsibilities that go with being a Latter Day Saint woman.

79UteOrange County, CA

Sept. 25, 2013 10:11 a.m.

The Ordain Women organizers say on their Web site that if they are refused
admission at the door they will leave peacefully and politely.

They
have already asked for admission and their request for tickets has already been
peacefully and politely refused.

So why are they going to the door
of the Conference Center knowing that they will again be refused admission?

It's obvious that they seek more than admission (no tickets were
given) or to have their request heard (already heard) or to demonstrate their
faithfulness to the Gospel and willingness to serve (that's done better in
other ways).

It appears that they want at the least more publicity,
which they have calculated to get.

It also seems to me, with all
due respect to them, that they are trying to provoke a negative public response
to heighten the publicity.

FYI, a woman attended our stake center
broadcast of the Priesthood session for several years; our stake leaders never
denied her admission.

apackLayton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 10:06 a.m.

I personally find it kind of sad that a group of women feel such a great need to
take on the role of a man in being a priesthood holder. To me, that says that
these women are not grasping the concept of how important their individual role
as a woman is. I don't think any of us can quite comprehend how sacred
women are to our loving Father in Heaven.

If we as women can learn to
recognize what an important and vital role we hold, because we are a woman, I
don't think there would be such a great desire for some women to feel as if
they need to be equal in every way as man. We are different from men, and for
good reasons.

Ladies, we are a vital part of this church.. There is
no other calling or responsibility on this Earth that is more important than
that of being a mom. What an awesome responsibility it is to bring into this
world a human life, to care for them, to nurture them, and to teach them. We are
the key to all of the future generations. Now that is amazing!

Mint JulipKAYSVILLE, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 10:02 a.m.

@cougarsare1: "I don't know what temple you go to with a second
endowment session, my guess is none. That doesn't happen."You
need to research your religion a little more thoroughly..

To everyone
making arguments that the priesthood is to keep men in check, and that women
don't need it because they have differing roles, etc. According to your
doctrine, the priesthood is actually the authority to act in the name of God. I
can understand faithful women, mothers and sisters wanting this authority. Many
women don't have a priesthood holder in their home. Their children wake up
sick, they need special blessings, they desire the guidance, counsel and
blessings that their priesthood-holder-blessed female neighbors have constant
access to in their homes.

It is confusing how women can act in the
name of God in the temple rituals without holding the priesthood, but can't
perform a healing blessing for their own child in their home. It is confusing
that they are ordained to be "priestesses" and wear the robes of the
priesthood in the endowment when they don't have the priesthood.

1.96 Standard DeviationsOREM, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:57 a.m.

DocHolliday-

Women were never ordained to the priesthood in the 1830s
in the church. Prophetesses in the Bible never held Priesthood keys of authority
as well. Don't make it look like it was otherwise.

At a time,
the prophet Joseph Smith allowed sisters to lay hands on others in the prayer of
faith. This was likely related to the church being extremely small at the time
and many men called away to serve missions. Don't mistake the laying of
hands as the priesthood -- the women never received it then and never did
priesthood ordinances or priesthood blessings.

HouTexan LassOKLAHOMA CITY, OK

Sept. 25, 2013 9:52 a.m.

I was still a young member of the church when my Spanish class instructor
revealed that I was a member of this church and thus had peculiar beliefs about
the native cultures of Mexico which we were about to study. After class, I was
approached by another student, a member of NOW, who asked me why, as an
intelligent woman, I'd belong to a church which didn't value women. I
had no idea what to say to her, and then I opened my mouth and words came out -
and I knew that what I was saying was true. What I said was encompassed by the
RS General President's statement. I said that men and women were simply
given different roles to fulfill, with one not being inferior or superior to the
other and with God not believing either incapable of filling the role of the
other. - And, incidentally, I often took my sons to our stake center for
priesthood meeting & remained outside, not because the messages were
different but because the spirit, the bonding time of the meeting was not
intended for me just as the RS general meeting was intended for women to be
together.

DocHollidayreno, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 9:45 a.m.

Hmmmm... Maybe you missed it. There are several scriptural references fromt he
old testament where women used or held the priesthood, so I don't know
where you are getting the statement "women were not given the priesthood
from Adam and Eve to the end of the Bible" as it is false.

Also,
aren't you awar that your church ordained women in the 1830's??
apparantly not.

Grillmaster21Springville, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:40 a.m.

Any Brethren care to join me for the General Relief Society meeting?

At this rate with Kate Kelly, an Elder should be at the head of the General
Relief Society Presidency.

...Oh, I thought this was
'opposite' of the Restored Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus
Christ.

My bad.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:31 a.m.

Say No to BO,To answer some of your questions...

RE "Where
is it written that women cannot have the priesthood"1. General
Handbook of Instructions.2. In the Bible (women were not given the
priesthood from Adam and Eve to the end of the Bible).

I'm like
you... if the policy changed tomorrow... I'd have no problem with that.
But like with the earlier priesthood revelation... it should come from a
unanimous outpouring of the spirit to the Christ's apostles and his
prophet... not from an activist.

WI_MemberAppleton, WI

Sept. 25, 2013 9:31 a.m.

Perhaps if priesthood holders' plans, assignments, callings, etc. were
subject to the approval and authority of the Relief Society, maybe the
priesthood holders would pay attention to what is taught in the General Relief
Society meetings. All who post that they couldn't care less what is said in
the women's meetings speak volumes about how women are valued in the
church.

trekkerSalt Lake, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:30 a.m.

It is the feminist attitude that is the problem, you do not demand the Prophet
of the Lord to do anything. You could ask him to pray to the Lord and ask if the
Lords wishes to change a stance, but they need to be willing to accept at this
time the Lord has not asked the prophet to change the priesthood to include
woman holding it. They should be careful the Church has excommunicated feminists
before that think they know better than the Lord and His prophet.

MisterDivotLehi, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:13 a.m.

@cougarsare1 and brahmabull:

There is a second annointing, something
sacred and holy and reserved for few. But the women who participate as
Brahmabull described do so without having been ordained to the Priesthood, and
that is completely fine. Many women participate in ordinances in the temple
today, anyone endowed knows this, yet they don't have to be ordained to
the Priesthood to administer such ordinances.

Fl CookieTangerine, FL

Sept. 25, 2013 9:12 a.m.

I am a very strong business woman who has to, at times, be very persuasive in my
dialog. When it comes to my home life I love being a woman. Why would a woman
want the role of a man when she already choose to be a woman in her pre-earth
life! That role comes with a lot of responsibility as well as a lot of
blessings. We women have all the blessing we need for eternal life as it is, if
we choose to accept them.

I question whether she is LDS. I know the
church won't let that information out. A person like this cannot have a
good understanding of the gospel or be living it to act like this.

Either it is the Lord's church and we accept his biding or it is the
church of man and people determine what happens.

Designer123Centerville, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:12 a.m.

I have mixed feelings about what's going on here.

First of all,
asking a question is what Joseph Smith did when he didn't know which Church
to join. He asked, he received an answer, and many people ridiculed his account.
There is nothing wrong with asking questions, and that is a basic principle of
the gospel. Personally, I think it's important to trust the Prophet and
follow his council, but it is each person's responsibility to ask God if
what they are learning is true and verify it for themselves. I think it is
perfectly acceptable and natural for these women and men to ask why women
don't have the priesthood, and to seek and discover where the truth lies.
And not just the truth according to what they want, but the real truth.

Political action is not the way to go, in my opinion, but it would be
great to have a frank, open discussion at some point about women's roles in
the Priesthood. In the meantime, finger pointing on either side needs to come to
a hault. Let's love one another and try to honestly reach for common
ground.

Say No to BOMapleton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 9:08 a.m.

Let me try one more time to get a message past the censors. Looking at the
practice of denying blacks the priesthood prior to 1978, what has happened of
late is instructive.We don't know why they were denied the priesthood
from Brigham Young to Harold B. Lee. It was the policy then. That is the
official explanation.Where is it written that women cannot have the
priesthood? We'd best teach it from the scriptures or new revelation,
sustained by the membership a la Official Declaration 3.

Fl CookieTangerine, FL

Sept. 25, 2013 9:04 a.m.

I am so surprised that she is not content to be blessed with her own identity,
which is more than sufficient for her to get the eternal blessings she needs. I
have been ordained and blessed with all I need as a woman. Sometimes I even
wield more power than my husband on some subjects because that is my area of
expertise. I do love to concede to his priesthood. He is a very wonderful,
praying and humble man who lives the gospel of Christ and honors his priesthood.

These blessings are gender related and so is the heavy load that
goes with them. I love being a woman. I am a very independent business woman
who prepares taxes and accounting. I love being the nurturing mother type when
life gives me that opportunity. I wonder why a woman would want all that male
power....power that is only obtained through righteous living. Are you sure she
is LDS?

Oh, and I have been watching the priesthood sessions on TV
and the internet for years.

cougarsare1Las Vegas, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 9:04 a.m.

@Dennis: "If women were given the Priesthood they would get everything
accomplished and the men would sit on their duffs and let them." You
probably make the best point right there for why men have the priesthood and
women do not and why it should stay that way.

@Brahmabull: I
don't know what temple you go to with a second endowment session, my guess
is none. That doesn't happen. However, anyone who is truly active in
Temple attendance (male or female) would recognize that, while women do not have
priesthood keys of leadership, they do have authority in the priesthood in the
temple.

Further, they would also recognize that in the eternities all
faithful, worthy women will have the priesthood.

JoseloELMWOOD PARK, NJ

Sept. 25, 2013 8:58 a.m.

The meeting of the Relief society is not a parallel meeting in any aspect. There
are going to be men in the relief society meeting. There are not going to be
women in the Priesthood meeting.

MisterDivotLehi, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:55 a.m.

Please read this scripture as well as my comments below :)

Jacob
4:8,10:

"Behold, great and marvelous are the works of the Lord.
How unsearchable are the depths of the mysteries of him; and it is impossible
that man should find out all his ways. And no man knoweth of his ways save it be
revealed unto him; wherefore, brethren, despise not the revelations of God.

Wherefore, brethren, seek not to counsel the Lord, but to take counsel
from his hand. For behold, ye yourselves know that he counseleth in wisdom, and
in justice, and in great mercy, over all his works."

My comments:
If you believe this work is man's work, your petitions will eventually
succeed and the priesthood will be granted to all. However, if you believe this
work is the work of God, then no petitions are necessary, all will be done
according to His will and timetable, whether that means priesthood authority is
extended to all regardless of gender or exclusively authorized to all worthy
males only.

In other words, by your actions, Ordain Women, you are
revealing that you believe this great work to be the work of man, not the work
of God!

bw00dsTucson, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 8:53 a.m.

@sharrona You are correct in that Deborah was a prophetess and even a "judge
in Isreal" for whatever that entailed--but there is no validation that she
held the priesthood. From "The Guide to the Scriptures:"

ProphetessSee also Prophecy, Prophesy

A woman who has
received a testimony of Jesus and enjoys the spirit of revelation. A prophetess
does not hold the priesthood or its keys. Though only a few women in the
scriptures are called prophetesses, many prophesied, such as Rebekah, Hannah,
Elisabeth, and Mary.

Miriam was called a prophetess:Ex. 15:20; Deborah was called a prophetess:Judg. 4:4; Huldah was called a
prophetess:2 Kgs. 22:14; ( 2 Chr. 34:22; ) Anna was called a
prophetess:Luke 2:36;

KynaWEST JORDAN, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:50 a.m.

I feel for those women who can't see that they are already equal to men. I
feel sorry that they see themselves as subservient to others. I'm FURIOUS
that they feel the need to include me. I hope many understand that is it not
"Women" who feel this way. Most of us honestly understand the role of
the Priesthood, understand how we already do exercise it, and do not want or
need worldly recognition. I do not for one minute believe that the decision to
broadcast this session of conference was or is for the sisters. It is for men
like my grandfather, who are housebound. Or those who do not have a meeting
house. My boys may watch from home, but I will not be there. I will be
allowing my husband to have those critical father and son teaching moments
alone. And after, we will do as we have always done - sit as a family and they
will share with us what they learned, and what they found inspiring and
enlightening. Just like we do after the RS and YW broadcasts.

Brahmabullsandy, ut

Sept. 25, 2013 8:48 a.m.

MacFan1950

That was just that general authorities opinion, not
doctrine. It isn't in the scriptures, so don't quote it as doctrine.

Brahmabullsandy, ut

Sept. 25, 2013 8:39 a.m.

FREDISDEAD

To you and others claiming women will NEVER hold the
priesthood and never have... you may want to check your facts. There is strong
evidence and numerous statments of women being ordained and holding priesthoods
in the church in the 1830's. So don't be so quick to throw out your
blanket statements of NEVER.

Also, in the second endowment ceremony
in temples, women lay their hands on the head of their husbands and give them a
blessing... How can this be done without some kind of priesthood power?

pumpkinHuntington, Utah

Sept. 25, 2013 8:38 a.m.

What is the big whoop. If they want the priesthood it is simple enough to start
their own religion and ordain themselves. To press this issue like this borders
on silliness.

kosimovRiverdale, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:34 a.m.

There are issues beyond the traditional about women holding the Priesthood. Some
are doctrinal, some are practical.

One purpose of the Priesthood in a
family is to receive revelations. The Lord has always established an order to
this, in families, in the Church, and so on. But imagine if both husband and
wife held the Priesthood. I suppose it would be convenient for giving blessings;
it would not be necessary to bother anyone else with blessing a sick child etc.
But, what if one parent receives a prompting that a sick child will be OK, while
the other believes they've been prompted to rush to the hospital. Who wins?
Just what we need - another pressure on the marriage relationship.

Not enough room here to expound more. Great societies have followed similar
paths to failure. One sign of a failing society is matriarchy becoming dominant.
And us?

God created the mortal bodies of Adam and Eve, but not their
intelligences. They have always existed, and our prophets have taught us that
their genders have always been male/female. It doesn't take rocket science
to imagine many other potential conflicts which would make families fail.

rpapaGilbert, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 8:33 a.m.

All Church doctrine and practices are received from the Lord via the authorized
ordained Prophet. It is not up to the Church membership to lobby or petition
the Brethren for change. It is dangerous to the health of the Church when
factions or groups start to question and challenge church practices. When the
Lord decrees something it is not for the members to challenge it. Whatever the
reasons , the Lord decreed that the Priesthood is for worthy male members only!
When a change is required it will be by the hand of the Lord through his
authorized servants, and not until then. Factions or "political" groups
are dangerous and will work to the downfall of the Church. One only needs to
look at other major Christian denominations to see that.

nmjimSANDIA PARK, NM

Sept. 25, 2013 8:32 a.m.

Why would females want to attend a males-only priesthood session so they could
hear the men being counseled and instructed to go home and listen to their
wives?

Mike in SalemSalem, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:29 a.m.

For those of us who are active members of the church, we know that almost all of
us have no problems with women being at priesthood meetings and as far as
general priesthood meeting goes, if a women were to show up at a stake center to
watch the priesthood broadcast, no one would object.

I think the
obvious reason that the church doesn't want an activist women's group
attending general priesthood at the conference center is they have a legitimate
fear that they intend to disrupt the meeting in some way. Accordingly, it
believe it is appropriate to deny their request.

As far as the
question of should women receive the priesthood goes, that question is above all
our pay grades. If the priesthood is real--and if someone doesn't believe
it is, why would they want it?--this is a change that can only happen through
revelation given to the prophet and the quorum of the twelve.

nanniehuTooele, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:29 a.m.

As a woman I have the same opportunity to receive the blessings of the
priesthood through worthy priesthood holders. We have a responsibility to
support our men in being righteous, not fight them for so called equality we
perceive we are missing out on. I have my role as a wife, mother, grandmother,
Young Women president, Visiting Teacher, and daughter of God. My husband has
his role as husband, father, grandfather, provider, counselor in the bishopric,
Home Teacher, and son of God. We compliment and support each other, and he does
all he can to support me both financially as well as cheer lead me in my
endeavors as an artist. I support him in his musical endeavors. Where's the inequality? What am I missing out on? If I need a blessing I
ask. If he sees I might need one, he offers. I can work in the temple, the same
as he does, we are a team. Sorry these women seem to be missing out on that part
of their lives, or have overlooked that. We need to be grateful and appreciative
of our respective roles in life and stop trying to compete or bring down men.

Tanner ManorDE BEQUE, CO

Sept. 25, 2013 8:29 a.m.

The Lord has never made men and women equal from the very beginning. In the
beginning he chose women to bare the children that he sends to this earth. He
did not allow both men and women to bare a child. What an awesome
responsibility he gave only to me as a woman. A responsibility that I would
never forfeit. I believe that it is of a most divine calling and I
wouldn't trade it for the world or to hold the priesthood. I love the fact
that we have different responsibilites on this earth. It seems to me that these
women do not understand the fullness of the gospel according to the scriptures.

sharronalayton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:26 a.m.

RE: zoar63 can anyone point out any examples from the scriptures where women
held (authority)?

When the Israelites did earnestly turn back to God,
God raised up a judge among them, who was strong, who would lead the Israelites,
and continue to keep them faithful to the Lord their God. Deborah was this
judge. Deborah would become the only woman to judge Israel. Not just a woman,
Deborah was also described as a prophetess and a wife."Prophetess, the wife
of Lapidoth who was judging Israel" (Judges 4:4).

Deborah is
characterized as a prophetess. In Deborahs Song, her love for the Lord is
described as "like the sun, when it comes in full strength" (Judges
5:31). Most probably this is the reason why God chose Deborah to communicate His
Will to the Israelites. Deborah was considered by the people as Gods
spokesperson and this helped to establish her respect among them. Though Deborah
was the only Israelite woman to become a judge; other Israelite women were
prophetesses such as Miriam and Huldah

will7370LOGAN, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:26 a.m.

Maybe a bunch of us men should go down to the local maternity ward of our
hospital and demand equal bed space----so bizarre.

skepticPhoenix, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 8:09 a.m.

This all has little to do with a Devine will, it is mostly about insecure
chauvinist males afraid of losing their patriarch demigods authority to female
competition .

LittleStreamCarson City, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 8:09 a.m.

I so respect the priesthood holders and the power they represent. My son, after
many years of inactivity is a priesthood holder, our Bishop is blessed with
understanding and carries a heavy load. The prophet must be a Shepard to each
one of us and is marvelous. Women with all that we do; teach the young, care
for the ward members who need us, assist with Family History and support the
priesthood, why do you want to do this?

Hey It's MeSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 8:07 a.m.

Let's face it, we live in the land of the "Free" which means we all
have the right to our opinion! So. . . if you don't like or believe fully
in your religion, go to a different church, or start your own. Why do all the
small minorities in this country feel like they need to change the majority to
their opinion. I've been a member of three different churches in my 57
years of life. I really love the one I'm at now. So if these women
don't like the LDS belief's then they should probably move on
and look at a church that accepts women in the Priesthood. Why do they want o
try to change the views of everyone else who believes in the LDS church
dpctrine? My impression of the church is that you sustain your leaders twice
every year, if they don't believe or sustain their leaders go find a church
that suits them. No one is forcing these women to go to the LDS church.

RynnLas Vegas, NV

Sept. 25, 2013 8:02 a.m.

There is such a sense of hostility within many of these comments. Obviously many
are not going to agree with the idea of women having the Priesthood. But we can
disagree civilly.Ridiculing this woman is unbecoming.

cafBountiful, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 7:56 a.m.

It is nice to see that only a few women are petitioning to hold the priesthood.
I myself have no desire to fulfill the roles of both genders. I am impressed
when family and friends help shoulder the care of our youth in single parent
households. I am SO grateful that I do not have to carry the responsibilities
of both roles in my life. Hats off to the men who appreciate and cherish their
wives. Kudos for the women who recognize, appreciate and support their
husbands. And thanks to those who are not married who are patient, offering
service when needed, and doing your best to buoy up your church family and
communities.

jn540Austin, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 7:52 a.m.

I can understand the perspective of Ordain Women. I do see mysogynistic
practices occuring locally, and hegmeonic attitudes still seem to prevail among
some members (both male and female).

For so long, our beliefs
regarding gender identity matched our traditional American social values. It
did not seem unreasonable in the 1920s for the curch to agree that only men
should have the right to vote. It seemed harmless for church and social beliefs
to be viewed as one and the same.

But as our social values have
changed course, the church no longer has that luxury. And piece by piece, we see
the church trying to sort through our practices to determine what we believe as
being foundational to our doctrine, and what we can cast aside as an outdated
social practice. My belief in the church and trust in our leaders has grown as
I have watched them carefully mine our core doctrine from the decades-built
mountain of Mormon dogma.

As for our more traditional members, I
would be careful not to call anyone "shameful" or "apostate".
This rhetoric has no persuasive value other than scare away those who are still
trying to figure this whole thing out.

fowersjlFarmington, Utah

Sept. 25, 2013 7:49 a.m.

Many years ago my oldest daughter, then 16, was asked by the Stake President to
speak in a Stake Priesthood meeting on scripture study. He said he really
wanted the young men to pay attention and thought this beautiful, articulate
girl could drive the message home. Because she was speaking I asked permission
as her mother to attend the meeting and permission was granted. She did a
superb job. I have reminded her of that experience and asked if she felt she
wanted to be a priesthood holder, and her answer was priceless: "No,
I'm too busy. I have other probably more important things to do." (She
has four children that she home schools.)

esodijeALBUQUERQUE, NM

Sept. 25, 2013 7:45 a.m.

What happened to the Community of Christ (RLDS Church) when it started ordaining
women? I'm told that fully one-third of its active membership left as a
direct result, and additional doctrinal dilution has diminished the church even
further. (An ongoing belief in modern revelation seems to be about the only
thing now that distinguishes the C of C from a number of protestant churches.)
One can argue about the objective merit of major doctrinal or policy changes in
a church--I personally am happy the LDS Church no longer practices polygamy or
bars persons of black African ancestry from the priesthood or temple
ordinances--but diminution is a natural consequence thereof.

MacFan1950Harlem, GA

Sept. 25, 2013 7:45 a.m.

From a visiting General Authority during our Stake Conference a coupe of years
ago:

"God gave women the ability to bear children so they can
learn to love and serve others. God gave men the ability to hold the priesthood
so they can learn to love and serve others."

It's just that
simple.

worfMcallen, TX

Sept. 25, 2013 7:42 a.m.

So many trouble makers.

Go find another church.

Just that
simple!

bandersenSaint George, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 7:35 a.m.

Hey men, get behind this movement. Give them the reigns of providing for a
family, paying taxes, leading business, and raising those unruly boys.
I've been wanting to do more hunting, fishing, and hiking.

jeanie orem, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 7:20 a.m.

Dennis, you do your gender a disservice. Men ARE special and God loves them
dearly, just as women are. We each have different steengths, even the physical
nature of our bodies speak to this.

I don't think you're
going to convince many that this is not God's choice and men are so weak
they would sit back and let the women do all the work if they could. I would
submit you don't know many active LDS men, or your opinion blinds you. With
or without the priesthood these men would be devoted and active because they
love God and want to follow their Savior.

elarueNEW YORK, NY

Sept. 25, 2013 7:19 a.m.

I would have just read this article and be interested in it, if it weren't
for this part:

"They are taking the attention away from the
reason we have general conference in the first place: to listen to what living
prophets have to say to us. Instead, they are trying to get the living prophets
to listen to them. That just seems wrong to me."

That seems to
imply that it's wrong to want the prophets to listen to us. But why? Why
is it wrong to want to have our concerns and feelings heard? Even if it's
not with the expectation that we're going to change anyone's mind, why
is simply wanting to be listened to such a bad thing?

windsorCity, Ut

Sept. 25, 2013 7:14 a.m.

Guess we should just be glad these ladies will be using their time and energies
trying to promote their agenda and pointlessly trying to get into priesthood
meeting---instead of stripping down to join the Utah Undie Run the next day.

If you wanna talk about folks treading on thin ice.............

Are you kidding meFruit Heights, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 6:41 a.m.

Are you kidding me? Number one: Who would want to go to another meeting? Number
two: These women really don't understand how the Lord works. If there were
to be any change in procedure, it would come through Jesus Christ himself
through his prophet, not through public opinion. These women need to search
their feelings and decide if they are doing it for the glory of God, or the
glory of themselves. This is God's power, not man's power. I for one
enjoy the blessings of God's power without having the obligation of bearing
that power. And I'm happy because that is the way the Lord set it up, and
to Him I give all glory, power, and honor.

raybiesLayton, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 6:25 a.m.

"This isn't really just about going to priesthood meeting." said
activist Kate...

My response is, "Well it should be."

If the message doesn't matter then the point is lost, no matter the
cause. It indicates there's more envy than actual understanding.

baddogCedar Rapids, IA

Sept. 25, 2013 6:19 a.m.

On Judgement Day, we will be judged for our actions and the intents of our
hearts.

I personally would not want to stand before the Lord or one
of his appointed servants to declare my stewardship and say, "Oh, by the
way, I never supported that idea that only men should hold the
priesthood."

These "old, fallible" men are directed by
God. Having served in callings with some nearness to some of these "old"
men, I can testify they are not operating under their own agendas.

If the Lord wants to change the order of things regarding the priesthood, He
will. Until then, it behooves us all to accept what has been revealed and live
that as well as we can, rather than agitate for personal agenda items.

QuagthistleHays, KS

Sept. 25, 2013 6:17 a.m.

I have never felt excluded from the Priesthood Session. I can watch it online
any time I want, just as the brethren can watch the Relief Socitey Broadcast any
time they want. But, if a bunch of guys were gate crashing the Relief Society
meeting, I would feel like they should be a bit less selfish. There's only
so room, and it should be reserved for those the meeting was designed for,
especially when a broadcast is availible for all. As to the other topic, women
holding the priesthood, all I can say is that those who desire this don't
seem to understand the priesthood. This idea that the world has to force
everything to be the same, even things that are not the same, is a very
destructive thing, indeed. I am not lessened by men having the priesthood, nor
do I resent that it's a priveledge given to men. Blessings, in whatever
form they may be, are gifts to us. What does it say of a child who just recieved
a bike and turns around to covet the new telescope of their sibling? I'd
hoped we were all better than this.

DennisHarwich, MA

Sept. 25, 2013 5:45 a.m.

For all of you that keep trying to remind me that this is for "Men" only
it's not the point. "Men" are not all that special. If women were
given the Priesthood they would get everything accomplished and the men would
sit on their duffs and let them. The Church decided to exclude women, not God.

TA1Alexandria, VA

Sept. 25, 2013 5:39 a.m.

Normally I am very liberal - but the LDS Church is a religion and within the
religion - the Church is perfectly within is rights to set bounds and limits.
The Priesthood is not for sale in a store on the street - so in my view - sorry
sisters - not even a debatable point.

mickisdaddyBel Air, MD

Sept. 25, 2013 3:58 a.m.

Probably the best comment I have heard on this was that men need the priesthood
to encourage us to be charitable and compassionate where women are naturally
inclined to those attributes.

Ant ONew Zealand, 00

Sept. 25, 2013 3:46 a.m.

I just wanted to thank you Sister Kelly,

I don't imagine more
eyes will have ever been more interested in viewing a priesthood session! I hope
that men & women all around the world, including Mormon or non-Mormon, have
an opportunity to understand what Mormon men hope to become by living to the
instructions that will be received. I hope more women outside the church because
of you Sister Kelly realize what they deserve in a husband and father, I hope
more women recognize the values a man must uphold to enable him rights to his
priesthood authority and the blessings a family may receive. One request is that
you refer more to The Family Proclamation to the World.

Cheers

Jake2010bountiful, ut

Sept. 25, 2013 1:34 a.m.

One of the first comments mentioned that the Priesthood meeting is for all
worthy Priesthood holders age 12 and up. I believe that is false. It is open to
all males ages 12-up whether they currently hold the priesthood or are worthy of
it. There is no worthiness interview to receive tickets. There is no flash your
temple recommend at the doors. All boys and men are part of a quorum whether
they are members or not... The neighborhoods they grow up in or presently live
are their quorum according to the ward they live within the boundaries of. There
is someone within the vicinity that can take any desiring of age participant to
the meeting. I really wish activism like this would stop. however, it
won't. It will I dare say only get worse with each passing year. Just hold
strong to your testimony and don't sway because of the opinions of the
wings.

JustTheTruthManbountiful, ut

Sept. 25, 2013 1:16 a.m.

I would venture to present that this request, what these women are seeking, will
be granted at precisely the same time that men are enabled to personally
experience the joys and travail of pregnancy and childbirth. There are certain
things that will not change, and no amount of pressure towards the contrary will
ever change that. The best they can hope for is like revelation of new doctrine
to help put this stuff to bed... So, I guess on the flip side, thank you for
'speeding' up the process. :)

ClarkHippoTooele, UT

Sept. 25, 2013 1:01 a.m.

I am not going to attempt to speak for the women of the LDS Church. It is simply
not my place. The fact of the matter is, society demands more of women in many
aspects. On top of that, even in 2013, women are still severely oppressed in
many parts of the world. So for me to attempt to speak for women and girls would
be totally foolish.

With that in mind, I will say I find the
motivation of these women's group who want to be ordained to the priesthood
as a bit suspect and here's why.

These women claim they simply
want to be treated as equal. OK, great! But will they practice what they preach?
Do public schools give boys the same opportunities they give to girls? Do TV
shows portray wives, daughters and working women the same as they do fathers,
sons and working men?

When was the last time our current President
gave a speech praising the hard working and determined BOYS in our country? When
was the last time you saw a TV news program talk about a boy who didn't
beat up his girlfriend or get caught with drugs?

zoar63Mesa, AZ

Sept. 25, 2013 12:52 a.m.

Can anyone point out any examples from the scriptures where women held the
priesthood?

Truth FishermanAtlanta, GA

Sept. 25, 2013 12:36 a.m.

I tried to join the Relief Society, but I couldn't pass the physical.

JanSanPocatello, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 11:49 p.m.

I am an active LDS woman and I cannot believe what I am reading!It was
explained very simply to me when I was a child.Got had TWO special gifts.
One was the Priesthood, which He gave to men. The second was giving birth, which
He gave to women. This was equal, each got their special gift. When men
start giving birth on their own - THEN will I start bellyaching about it not
being fair. Until then I will remember the sister of Moses who tried to be equal
with him and was cursed for trying to take on her own what God had given to men.
This REALLY upsets me big time!

Colorado PatriotGrand Junction, CO

Sept. 24, 2013 11:45 p.m.

Come on sisters! If you think you should have the priesthood, then you belong
to the wrong church and should find another one that suits you. Good grief,
don't you have enough to do?

LtrainSt. George, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 11:42 p.m.

I think Eve should have petitioned God to have been the one to have assisted in
the creation. Apparently, many of the people commenting on this article
haven't been inside a temple. Or, possibly, weren't paying attention.

HutteriteAmerican Fork, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 11:29 p.m.

Ladies, you've been given your choice. Status quo, or else.

bleeding purpleSanta Ana, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 11:14 p.m.

Why do I have to have it and do it ALL? Why do we all have to be the same? I
like the different roles my husband and I have. If I'm ever offered the
Priesthood, I will have to decline ... I'm too busy doing everything else!

Paul BohmanArlington, VA

Sept. 24, 2013 11:13 p.m.

Someday we will look back on this time and we will remember what it was like
before women could be ordained to the priesthood. And we will be glad that those
days are over.

AtrixVancouver, WA

Sept. 24, 2013 11:09 p.m.

Why can't men naturally bare children? Why can only men have the
priesthood? Since we humans in our imperfect state cannot fully comprehend the
fullness of God's knowledge and greatness, we should all follow God's
council and follow him in faith. No man or woman holds any right to challenge or
tempt God. His plan is perfect, his knowledge is perfect and it will do us right
to follow his direction given through living prophets. What he has taught us is
that man and woman have distinct and eternal roles. We were not created to be
the 'same'. If women were the same as men there would be no
difference. We were made differently to fulfill different responsibilities. As
men and women come together in one heart and one mind each fulfilling their
eternal role and purpose, then perfection can be reached. And like our Father in
Heaven we can become.

WestGrangerWest Valley City, Utah

Sept. 24, 2013 10:44 p.m.

Sister Kelly lacks a basic understanding the purpose of the priesthood. It is
exists to humbly service others. Women serve others, men serve others. Is she
saying that the ways that men serve is superior to the way men serve, that
somehow sameness would achieve some kind of equality of power? I thinks these
ways are equal and both essential. The priesthood is explicitly stated as not
being meant to be used in any way to exert power or control over women or anyone
else.

AZDZRTFOXHucahuca City, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 10:38 p.m.

I just thin of when Martin Harris repeatedly pleaded with the Prophet Joseph
about the Book of Lehi. Bro. Harris really, really wanted the manuscript to
prove to his wife their veracity. He got them eventually. Yep, that all worked
out great for us, didn't it. The Lord let it be lost to us for a time
because Bro. Harris and the Prophet wouldn't take no for an answer. It
wasn't the will of the Lord, but both Bro. Harris and the Prophet needed
to be humbled, and we all lost out because of it. I am certain the prophets
have repeatedly petitioned the Lord about the issue of the priesthood and women.
The answer has been no. Why? Because that's what the Lord has said. If
these women had the faith they proclaim to have, they would accept this answer
and let the will of the Lord happen, not what they want to happen. Isn't
that what faith is?

Tom KempEast Hamnpton, CT

Sept. 24, 2013 10:28 p.m.

Priesthood sessions have been broadcast on television in the past. All
conference sessions are recorded and live video, audio and print versions of the
Priesthood session have been widely available for decades to anyone that wants
to listen or see the talks.

AZKIDMapleton, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 10:17 p.m.

I have taken note, in recent years, of the Community of Christ (formerly the
Reorganized Church) and their full embrace of the "me too" ecumenicism,
including the ordination of women to their "priesthood" which has
naturally led to several women "apostles". Something just seems wrong
about that. Bottom line: In my opinion, this just further demonstrates their
continuing drift from Truth. Will the Latter-day Saints likewise start down
this slippery slope of bowing to the popular causes of the day? I think not.

christophBrigham City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 10:07 p.m.

All people can read the Ensign: past, present and future, where the proceedings
are covered; all people can pray. Only women can bear children however, so
there are differences. Differences make life wonderful. Boring world if we
all looked the same and had same personality.

kactusSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 9:33 p.m.

Does OW think that God does not know they feel this way? Or think He won't
be interested in addressing their concerns unless they throw a faux-protest at
conference? Why do these women think God's chosen prophet needs that sort
of reminder to consult with God over these issues? Do they think they are
personally responsible for making sure he's doing his job? Why do they
presume they are speaking for a larger body of Mormon women with the same
feelings? Maybe most Mormon women don't want this? Do they think media will
influence God's decision? Why can't they ask God about their concerns
through prayer and scripture study like the rest of us? AND ON THE OTHER SIDE:
why do people think it's their responsibility to prove that this notion is
against the will of God? There is NO reason to fight these women about equality
or tell them they are evil. Being kind is good. If God doesn't think women
should have the Priesthood at this time, He won't give it to them. Which
will prove to be a better explanation than anything you have to offer.

FredExSalt Lake, Ut

Sept. 24, 2013 9:23 p.m.

It is beyond ironic that people want their true church to change its doctrine to
suit their personal desires.

jenclaSioux Falls, SD

Sept. 24, 2013 9:17 p.m.

Gordon B. Hinckley said:

"Women do not hold the priesthood
because the Lord has put it that way. It is part of His program. Women have a
very prominent place in this Church. Men hold the priesthood offices of the
Church. But women have a tremendous place in this Church. They have their own
organization. It was started in 1842 by the Prophet Joseph Smith, called the
Relief Society, because its initial purpose was to administer help to those in
need. It has grown to be, I think, the largest women's organization in the
world... They have their own offices, their own presidency, their own board.
That reaches down to the smallest unit of the Church everywhere in the world...
The men hold the priesthood, yes. But my wife is my companion. In this Church
the man neither walks ahead of his wife nor behind his wife but at her side.
They are co-equals in this life in a great enterprise"

I
don't know if women will ever have the priesthood but if they do receive it
one day it will be because the Lord has declared it so.

curbeeNorth Las Vegas, NV

Sept. 24, 2013 9:17 p.m.

hilarious! once again its someone who joined the chess club and wants to make
everyone play checkers. anyone who wants to attend another meeting is out of
their mind anyway! i could care less if the guys meet without me--grateful to
not be invited! grow up ladies and find a productive way to spend your life!

socornyCanyon Country, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 9:08 p.m.

Kathryn Skaggs, sorry to break the news to you, but you're wasting your
time and energy. You clearly have no understanding of the equal, but different,
roles of men and women in the church. Boy, you could really do some good by
focusing your time and energy on service, missionary work or genealogy and
temple work, rather than spinning your wheels with your little misguided and
misplaced crusade.

birderSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 9:07 p.m.

It boils down to this. Folks, God has created worlds for a long time, and He has
established divine roles and responsibilities for both men and women. If you
read and believe the Proclamation to the World on the Family, the roles for men
and women were ordained (assigned) in the premortal life. Remember - God has
done all of this before. He is not just practicing on us like a student teacher
in a classroom. He knows what He is doing. Do we really understand the true
character of God as explained in the Lectures on Faith - that He is all-knowing?
If so, then we exercise faith in His prophets and in His timing. Then we
don't worry about the questions He has chosen not to answer. We devote our
time to the things we should be doing here and now - keeping our covenants,
serving others, expanding the Church, etc. There is plenty of work for all of us
to do right now. Yes, there is plenty of work for women - even without formal
priesthood ordination.

OC FanOrange County, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 9:01 p.m.

This is my second try for a comment. The DN staff didn't appreciate my
attempt at levity. I'll bet mine is not the only comment rejected on this
topic! I appreciate the sensitivity the staff has for the Ordain Women group,
but I still think they should give them tickets to the BYU game.

I
went to the Ordain Woman blog, which says: "Ordain Women aspires to create
a space for Mormon women to articulate issues of gender inequality they may be
hesitant to raise alone. As a group we intend to put ourselves in the public eye
and call attention to the need for the ordination of Mormon women to the
priesthood."

I respectfully take issue to the statement that
there is a "need" for women to be ordained. The group simply wants to
call attention to their "desire" for the priesthood. Hello?

I'm only writing this because I want to see if the staff rejects me
again. If they do, I will march on the DN offices to express my desire to be a
member of the staff. I could screen comments.

stnicollmesa, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 8:59 p.m.

Kryssy--You make good points in your argument--but I also think you miss the
point in consideration of the opinion piece-we have no real understanding as to
why Kelly and her activists are choosing to do this. we do not know their
motivations- we do know that if we as individual gospel learners, church
members, priesthood bearers, temple goers, etc that if we defy against gospel
standards, principles, leadership etc. then we are much like in a boat without
oars amongst a raging river. The issue is that you, nor I, nor Ms Kelly receives
revelation for this church and we have made commitments and covenants to the
Lord-to sustain His chosen prophets and leaders--and it has nothing to do with
any research, history, etc. But very simple--Our willingness to stay the
course--Who's on the Lord side Who?

Scott G.NORTH SALT LAKE, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 8:52 p.m.

So why do they think they have to be there when they can watch it on TV now?

byu rugbyCrystal Lake, IL

Sept. 24, 2013 8:42 p.m.

If they give the women the priesthood then we men could stay home on Sunday and
watch sports uninterrupted. Not a bad idea! They can handle everything
themselves and stop nagging us to be an example! And, if we could get them to
not shriek when they spot a bug or expect us to do inconvenient things because
"we are men" life would be perfect. Just show up to the wedding, make a
donation once in a while, and leave us alone other wise!

I
don't need to be equal. let the women be in charge. I wonder what a
"chick fight" would look like if they also ran all the countries?

lqqkpocatello, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 8:40 p.m.

If Kate Kelly needs more to do in the church, have I got a list for her!

idabluIdaho Falls, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 8:33 p.m.

I just don't understand how you can believe in the divinity of the Church
on one hand but deny the divinity of the Prophet(s) on the other. But looking
back on Church History I guess that is how most apostasies start.

I
would ask Sister Kelly this question:How does this protest show that you
are supporting and sustaining the Prophet, the Quorum of the Twelve, the other
general authorities and local leaders of the Church?

Please
understand, Sis Kelly, your efforts, though noble, are misguided, and will only
lead to heartache.

sammygSpringville, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 8:05 p.m.

I could not help but remember Sonia Johnson when reading this article.

Making a media event out of this will serve no purpose but to quicken their
journey to apostasy.

Sad

DLS72Springville, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 7:56 p.m.

How sad. A bright, articulate woman has questions and is seeking answers just as
the religion she adopted has instructed her and whose founder employed the same
exercise. Now, here come all the zealots pointing their fingers in
stone-throwing fashion, telling her she is wrong, audacious, and deceived by
"Satin".

Glad we can all play God here and dictate to one of
his children the opinions of their own faith-based tenets. You'd think
they've all seen God and know his absolute will or something.

Sister Kelly, God bless you. None of know all the answers—If we did,
we'd all be transfigured by now.

JuleStafford, VA

Sept. 24, 2013 7:49 p.m.

Isn't it wisdom to not only allow, but actually encourage, the guys to have
special guy-time focused on goodness with reverence?

Women, by
natural ability, have so much responsibility already, it would be un-equal to
also give us the duties of the Priesthood (we already have the blessings).

Most importantly, did they ask The Lord what He wants?

KryssyBoise, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 7:41 p.m.

@NoCoolName_Tom: False: There are sources that given about the women's
nature being equal to the priesthood of men in modern and recent times. Here are
some examples for you. Enjoy. 1. Teaching the Doctrine of the Family by Sister
Julie B. Beck; Relief Society General President. 2. "To the Mothers of
Zion" by President Ezra Taft Besson Feb. 1987.

The roles of both
male and female are evident and natural and have been since the start of
man-kind. Mind you, this does not make the other unequal. Adam was to preside
over the home, not rule. As LDS, we believe that both couples are equal in their
responsibility in the home. One is not above the other. The ability for women to
nurture is obvious. Most males do not have the same capability to nurture as
naturally and as giving as most females. It's been proven in several
studies and I do have resources for these as well. Here's one of many:
"The State of Our Unions: The National Marriage Project." Search it.

KryssyBoise, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 7:39 p.m.

@Dennis: Think about it, both partners should not be holding priesthood.
It's quite a responsibility! There's a reason why men are given the
priesthood- they do not have that nurturing form in their home. Instead, their
blessing to the family is the priesthood.

KryssyBoise, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 7:38 p.m.

@Ohio-LDS: We each do have the ability to love; after all, we are here to become
more like our Savior who has loving forever flowing for each of God's
children. However, the roles of motherhood do not come natural to men as stated
previously and in these talks. It is a God-given responsibility that each of us
has individually to find the potential God sees in us. This potential is
essentially found in our gender and the blessings we receive from being our own
individual. The leaders of the church have stated that women's natural
gifts and rights to motherhood were given to them in the premortal as was the
priesthood to men. We were each bestowed with these gifts in order to benefit
our homes and our preparation for the next life. There should be no question to
why men have the priesthood and why women are blessed with their own set of
gifts. There are used for equal purpose, not one higher than the other. The Lord
knows best and He is the one who presented them and bestowed them upon us.

KryssyBoise, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 7:37 p.m.

Here's my little rant... We women have been given gifts as equally
great as the priesthood, as General Authorities have previously stated on many
occasions. The reason priesthood is given to men is because they need it for
their growth. Women do not need it for their growth- we've already got
God-given gifts within. That should be enough.

We are no less than
men. We each have individual gifts that are foreordained to have equal
partnerships in our marriage, to strengthen each other and balance us as equals.
What a gift it is to be a woman! We should be happy to be blessed with the
inborn gifts God has given us!

JustmythoughtsProvo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 7:33 p.m.

There are differences between males and females. I know that is a shock to some
people. One is not better than the other ... I like the differences....I
don't want to be a female and my wife doesn't want to be a male.

Femanist7Springville, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 7:27 p.m.

Sorry, @Johnny Triumph. I'm with Ohio.

"I wish at times
that I could have the same abilities to love, nurture, and bless lives like
women have to offer."

Seriously? That is such a scapegoat and
stereotype that you've bough into. I mean, what would you say about me? A
man who is much more nurturing than my wife and someone who has learned to love
like the Christ I have studied, loves.

Maybe try harder then?

zoar63Mesa, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 7:25 p.m.

If you are an active Latter-Day Saint and frequently attended the temple then
you should know how men and women relate to the priesthood. The endowment is all
about the priesthood. It is a cumulative ceremony building up to the fullness
with both men and women actively participating.

LO_Pittsburgh, PA

Sept. 24, 2013 7:17 p.m.

Why in the world would anyone want to attend an extra meeting???!

KermitKaysville, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 7:14 p.m.

Well, if I were God, and I had a church on earth, I would think that I might
have the prerogative of directing the affairs of that church. Interesting that
a very small part of the body would tell the Head of the church what to do.
It's rare that a person would wake up and say, "I think I'll
counsel God as to what He should do with His church today!"

If a
person stopped to think about and respect what members of The Church of Jesus
Christ of Latter-Day Saints actually believe- that God/Christ IS the head of the
church, then maybe it being the way it is might make sense! Imagine that! If
that IS true, then you're okay! If it is NOT true, then just go and start
your own church and do with it as you please.

Honestly, if these
women who are seeking priesthood ordination knew anything about what they
believe, they would realize that they are really not missing out on anything,
but would realize that the priesthood is the invitation for men to learn to be
worthy of manhood- and ultimately worthy of the companionship of womanhood.

cherrybearAtoka, TN

Sept. 24, 2013 7:12 p.m.

We already know that the Priesthood is for the men to hold. Why bother the Lord
asking again. It reminds me of when Martin Harris asked Joseph to pray about
getting the pages of the Book of Mormon. Our God is an unchanging God. Only
because society changes doesn't mean the church or God will.

FREDISDEADWest Point, ny

Sept. 24, 2013 7:07 p.m.

These women are so completely clueless. The Priesthood of God has NEVER been
held by women and NEVER will. For this woman to try and say it has been
"expanded" over time shows how she truly has NO idea WHAT the Priesthood
is or the purpose of it in the Church of Jesus Christ.

Just like the
supposed GAY man on here who is waiting for the opportunity to be sealed in the
Temple to his "eternal" gay companion. Will NEVER happen. Not part of
ETERNAL principles that will NOT change no matter how much SATAN tries to make
right look wrong to those who have lost the Holy Ghost as their companion.

goutahutesCedar Hills, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:53 p.m.

To our protesting sisters, If you want something bad enough, try to go
about it the old fashioned way. Humble yourselves and Pray.

Dr. ThomLong Beach, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 6:52 p.m.

I was raised by a single Aunt, so when general priesthood session time came
around, I just went with a male cousin or my scout leader. Not hard to do at
all

goutahutesCedar Hills, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:45 p.m.

Everyone should be heard, but using sacred meetings like Sacrament Meeting and
General Conference as your forum of protest demonstrates how little regard you
have for your Heavenly Father and more about some personal agenda. These
protests during these sacred meetings are offensive, and not much different than
the people protesting outside the Temple Square walls during conference.

rightascensionProvo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:30 p.m.

Guys nights out get increasingly harder and harder to orchestrate. General
Priesthood broadcast was the major guys night out event of the spring and autumn
social seasons – sometimes with dinners out afterward. With this
announcement the LDS priesthood holding father can watch the broadcast at home
with his wife and kids. This is change amid change.

New YorkerPleasant Grove, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:28 p.m.

This article is historically incorrect. Priesthood meeting was broadcast live
once before for just one session. I'm not sure anymore the exact year, but
I was perhaps under President Lee. Then they went back to closed meetings again.

Dr. ThomLong Beach, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 6:28 p.m.

Any person who has received their endowments regardless of gender would already
know that for the priesthood to be fully implemented temporally or spiritually
both men and women have to hold the priesthood but modified for each genders
needs and roles in an eternal continuum.

snowmanProvo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:18 p.m.

Dennis: the boys priesthood leaders would take him.

Johnny Triumph:
men can be just as loving and nurturing as a woman But women spend more time
with the kids than a father would.

Women can particpate in the
blessing of the priesthood too

I know it. I Live it. I Love it.Salt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 6:08 p.m.

I have to believe that the women invested in this issue, while possibly very
well-meaning, have a focus that is being lead by someone other than our Heavenly
Father.

Heavenly Father directs the affairs of the church. He is
unchanging and always directing things for our benefit. If we are ready to have
things revealed to us we didn't possess yesterday, they will be revealed.
We must have faith in that. There isn't faith in asking our Heavenly Father
to give us blessings now instead of tomorrow. If it will come, it will. If it
will not, then we must accept that.

The world defines equality in
several different ways; none of which are perfect and aligned with God. The
order in which He directs us is already equal. It is an equality that is
perfect, unlike what we are taught by the world.

Obedience to
Heavenly Father is something very important to us. There is an order in His
kingdom and it is calculated to bring us happiness. If we are in disharmony with
it, or desire it to operate differently the error is within us, not God's
work.

ShushannahKendal, Cumbria

Sept. 24, 2013 5:56 p.m.

As far as I can remember, no righteous man who desired the priesthood but was
unable to hold it (eg Gentiles in Biblical times, certain worthy males before
1978) was ever punished for having that desire. However, it may be recalled that
Miriam, the sister of Moses, was punished sorely by The Lord for just such a
desire... Be careful what you wish for, sisters...

Other
denominations have women ministers, true... But these do nothing more than our
own Relief Society Presidencies do; In fact, Relief Society sisters all do as
much, or more, within our communities. Other denominations hold no keys, nor are
they authorised to act in the Lord's stead. Anyone envying these people has
neither a testimony of, nor an understanding of, the Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints, and of the Lord's dealings with his children, and the
set-up of his church.

May I respectfully suggest that any sister (or
brother) struggling with this issue, should turn to The Lord in prayer, study
the scriptures, ancient and modern, and visit the House of The Lord often, in
order to gain a greater understanding of the Plan of Salvation.

Capt MoroniPerris, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 5:49 p.m.

What always astonishes me is how some women want equality even in the priesthood
when we as Men do not want that same equality in the home. Motherhood is a
sacred and real calling. I could NEVER do what my wife does for our children, so
why would she ever want to do what I do in the Priesthood?! The Lord's
House is a House of Order, and there is a season to all things under
Heaven...Why do women feel they need to share in everything a Man does?
Don't they understand how important they are in the Lord's House?

Itsme2SLC, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:47 p.m.

As a female who served a mission for the church, I say Kate Kelly is on a
slippery slope. I have all the blessings of the Priesthood and I don't need
to hold it. What is it about being the same as men? We are equal, but we
don't all have the same responsibilities. When are men going to have the
right to bear children? We don't see them protesting about a right Kate has
that men don't have. If you understand the church at all, as a woman you
don't feel the need to pretend to this so-called right that Kate thinks
women should have.

john dREXBURG, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 5:45 p.m.

these woman don't care about god plan they care about the worlds way
Christ said be in the world don't be of it. these woman can choose the way
of the world. benson said we can stand up for the kingdom of god or kingdom of
the devil. you choose

iktmRlHenderson, NV

Sept. 24, 2013 5:41 p.m.

Christ lives! He is our Master, our Lord, our Redeemer, and is the head of this
church! He hears the concerns of these women, and he invites all to draw nearer
to Him for answers. We need to follow the counsel of our Prophet and the
scriptures always, and even when we think things need to change, we must always
sustain our Lord and his servants in diligence and faith. He will bless us for
our obedience, faith, and humility. We have much to learn, and there is much the
Father and the Son wants to teach us. Our roles have potential beyond anything
we can comprehend at this point. Reading the Book of Mormon and drawing nearer
to Christ and the Father in prayer will reveal what their will is for us
individually, and what we are capable of in this life and the life to come.

Here's betting the number will be
nowhere near that. Or that, if 200 women actually do show up, only a tiny
fraction will be actual members of the Church.

This is nothing more
than naked aggression against and persecution of the Church by a tiny, tiny
cabal of non-believers. They've chosen to affiliate themselves with the
usual small crowd of antis and apostates, and their goal is to bring down,
rather than to build up Zion.

Real people can't help but feel
sorry for them.

JT4Salt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:26 p.m.

I think the women in question here are forgetting the First Great Commandment.
Unless they don't believe that God has called those in authority in the
Church, in which case why would they be concerned about hearing what they have
to say?

RainmanSyracuse, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:23 p.m.

Comparing black men and women in the priesthood isn’t apples to apples.
To obtain the Celestial Kingdom, a man needs the priesthood but this is not
required for a woman.

If Christ revealed to his prophet that women
should have the priesthood I would accept it with all my heart. If you would
like to pray for that go ahead. I have no problem with that. My feeling is
that it’s difficult enough to obtain exaltation. Why spend time and
energy on something that won’t affect your ability to obtain it? Why not
focus that time and energy on something you do have control over which will help
lead to your salvation. The adversary loves it when we get distracted.

Fern RLLAYTON, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:22 p.m.

' "This is about the ordination of women to the priesthood," said
Kelly, an international human rights attorney in Washington, D.C.... '

This drive to have women ordained to the priesthood is insulting. It
insults me that a large number of people should think that I would need to have
the priesthood to have self respect or be better in any way.

Are
these women so selfish as to push their own agenda without considering how
insulting it is to some of the rest of us?

That is my own opinion as
a woman who grew up in this church through the 1950's until now.

BebyebeUUU, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:20 p.m.

This will change just like African Americans and the priesthood. If women
aren't allowed in they will leave. If the Mormon church loses the women,
it loses everybody.

DuckhunterHighland, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:18 p.m.

By saying that women should receive the preisthood what these women, and the
males that support them, are saying is that the church itself is not true, its
doctrine is incorrect, Christ did not establish its order, and that the prophets
and apostles are not in tune with God and his will.

So why do they
wish to even be a part of it?

I would never try to change a religion
to fit my personal desires, what would be the purpose? It is not my church and
it is not based on my selfish desires, it is Christs church and its doctrine is
his. To try to force Christ to change his doctrine to placate the desires of
yourselves is to put yourself above Christ. How very sad.

ulvegaardMedical Lake, Washington

Sept. 24, 2013 5:12 p.m.

When ever this issue surfaces, the immediate example used as proof possitive
that women will eventually be ordained is that once, the priesthood was extended
to all worthy men. But the comparison is an apples to oranges one. Prior to
the change in 1978, temple blessings were denied to an entire ethnic group.
Currently, temple blessing are not denied to any worthy member of the church -
male or female.

From Ted's HeadOrem, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 5:01 p.m.

I believe that we often make up explanations where none exist so we don't
have to say "I don't know."

First off, do you believe
that the LDS Church is Christ's restored gospel that is led by a living
prophet? No? Then why are we bothering to have a conversation about the
practices of the LDS Church if we're not starting from the same point? For
the sake of argument?

So, let's say you are a believer and next
we can see if we agree about the way change comes to the Church. Is it from
press releases and protests? How about from the Prophet and Apostles petitioning
the Lord for more wisdom on a given topic? If one believes that the LDS Church
is just another organization then why not make a big fuss, create alliances, and
campaign for the changes you desire? And certainly there would be few reasons in
this day and age to exclude women from the priesthood. But...if Christ is the
one in charge here, shouldn't we be praying for patience and understanding,
not change according to our desires?

By their fruits ye shall know
them.

WilliamLeeOgden, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:55 p.m.

I have been a member of this wonderful Church and I am a High Priest in the
Melchizedek Priesthood. My wife is in Relief Society. We are both converts to
this church and have been for 37 years. Not once have I ever wanted to attend
RS Conference, as I knew those messages were meant for the sisters and young
women of the church. My wife has shown no interest in attending General
Priesthood. Yet after these meetings we discuss what we came away with from the
meetings. I'm not passing judgement, but it saddens me to see how these
sisters could be putting their memberships on the line. They are treading on
apostasy and I pray they counsel with the Lord on what they are doing is wrong.

flynn is the coolestSan Diego, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 4:55 p.m.

Kate Kelly is asking the wrong question. Rather than ask "why can't
women have the priesthood?" she should be asking, "Is there such a thing
as priesthood, and does the LDS church have it?" If the LDS church
doesn't have the priesthood, women are being denied nothing. If the LDS
church does indeed have the priesthood, then the church also has the authority
to administer said priesthood. Can she not see the conundrum?

oldcougarOrem, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:44 p.m.

Is it offensive or exclusionary for Jesus to be a man? "Savior, Messiah, and
Creator" are all callings that require the priesthood. Will we be lobbying
God for a female Messiah? How far does the agitation go? Is the desire to hold
the priesthood and be on equal footing with men just a here and now thing? If
you truly believe in the gospel and the eternity of our Spirits, do you believe
females in the pre-existence were just slackers and that they lazily left the
priesthood agitating to a tiny group of women among a very small group on the
earth during this dispensation? Has God always been behind the times and old
fashioned? After all these eternities, you would think he could get it
right...or at least right for you.

grandmagreatLake Havasu City, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 4:41 p.m.

My heart goes out to these women, who do not understand the Gospel that was
inspired. How can any woman who has served a mission be a leader of this group.
I have served in the church in many callings, many of them vry time consuming,
and have been blessed by those callings. Working with the priesthood Authority
in my Wards and Stakes. i have been grateful for these callings and blessed by
that service. My question is how many of these women who woould like the
priesthood have done one single thing for humanitarian Service. Have Taught one
Glass of girls and counseled one girl tht is having problems, that she would not
talk to her parents about.. We don't need the priesthood to do this, we
just need those grat priesthood Leaders who have requested we do our part. My
prayers are with the women, that want to change the things of the Lord's
church. I am a lifelong member of the church, my ancestors were driven out of
Nauvoo, thse women sacrificed much for the church and they followed the prophet.
I suggest that you do the same.

Razzle2Bluffdale, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:39 p.m.

Oh, how I hope they just give them the tickets and they simply walk in. No
news here.

BYU&UW FAN West Jordan, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:37 p.m.

I am not for or against women having the priesthood, but I am against attacking
church leadership.

To me the biggest issue with this group is the
tactic of trying to bring a protest to a church meeting. It seems that the whole
purpose of this group is to attack the church. I have been paying attention to
the Facebook group for some time, and it seems many are anti LDS. The saying
wolf in sheep's clothing comes into mind with this group.

CanyontrekerTAYLORSVILLE, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:30 p.m.

Dennis "Isn't it interesting that the Church would keep (any) woman out
of the proceedings yet have a meeting that 12 year old boys can attend."

Isn't it interesting that the Church would set-apart a 12-year old
girl by the laying on of hands through the power of the Priesthood to be a
Beehive President.

flynn is the coolestSan Diego, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 4:29 p.m.

Kate Kelly is asking the wrong question. Rather than ask "why can't
women have the priesthood?" she should be asking, "Is there such a thing
as priesthood, and does the LDS church have it?" If the LDS church
doesn't have the priesthood, women are being denied nothing. If the LDS
church does indeed have the priesthood, then the church also has the authority
to administer said priesthood. Can she not see the conundrum?

patriotCedar Hills, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:23 p.m.

If this woman has been endowed in the temple ..then she should reflect on the
endowment ceremony because she clearly and sadly doesn't understand it nor
does she understand or appreciate her role as a woman and a mother. If she
hasn't been endowed then I would recommend that she make the changes
necessary in her own life to go to the temple and receiver her own endowment -
not only for the promised blessings but also of knowledge and
understanding...not as the world teaches but as The Spirit teaches.

The Church teaches that women and men are indeed equal partners in the Lords
eyes and their roles are equally important. To feel somehow slighted for not
getting what men get is to simply not understand the gospel of Jesus Christ.

E.SBountiful, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:21 p.m.

“Women do not hold the priesthood because the Lord has put it that way. It
is part of His program. Women have a very prominent place in this Church. Men
hold the priesthood offices of the Church. But women have a tremendous place in
this Church. They have their own organization. It was started in 1842 by the
Prophet Joseph Smith, called the Relief Society, because its initial purpose was
to administer help to those in need. It has grown to be, I think, the largest
women’s organization in the world... They have their own offices, their
own presidency, their own board. That reaches down to the smallest unit of the
Church everywhere in the world." --- Pres. Gordon B. Hinckley

Women do have a place in this Church and they do have administrative positions
in it as well. Go tell Sheri Dew, Julie Beck, Heidi Swinton, Ruth Todd and the
primary president in all wards and stakes that their callings are not
administrative or that they are less important to this work just because they do
not have the priesthood!

This whole thing is ridiculous...

Alex 1Tucson, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 4:19 p.m.

Consider the following scripture:

Doctrine & Covenants
84:33-34:33 For whoso is faithful unto the obtaining these two priesthoods
of which I have spoken, and the magnifying their calling, are sanctified by the
Spirit unto the renewing of their bodies.

34 They become the sons of
Moses and of Aaron and the seed of Abraham, and the church and kingdom, and the
elect of God.

That brings me to the question. How many of you ladies
want to become a son? (Just a thought.)

Mike JohnsonStafford, VA

Sept. 24, 2013 4:19 p.m.

I download every session of conference including the priesthood session and the
relief society/young womens session and listen to them as a I commute to work
over the next week after conference. They all give wonderful counsel. And
anybody anywhere in the world can do so.

This story did indicate that
the priesthood session will be broadcast over the internet live, meaning I
won't have to drive to the stake center to listen.

As for women
holding the priesthood, anytime the Lord says to do so, I am prepared to support
it. Priesthood means work and service to others. It does not mean power or glory
to oneself. It does not mean authority to dominate anybody else ("amen to
the authority" of anybody who tries that). It simply means service to others
and I am more than happy to hand off that service to women. Most would do a
better job than I do.

CanyontrekerTAYLORSVILLE, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:14 p.m.

she continued, "and we want to go to priesthood meeting so we can show our
leaders that we are ready for both the benefits and responsibilities of the
priesthood. That is our focus."

Women have the benefits and
responsibilities of the priesthood.1- Women are set apart by the laying on
of hands to perform callings as teachers, missionaries, and leaders.2-
Women are essential to temple work through the Priesthood to "redeem the
dead." Now, how many ordained women from other churches can do that?3-
Women lead prayers and talks in our congregations.

Julie R.Kearns, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:14 p.m.

Ladies, we have ALWAYS been on the same spiritual footing as the men. We have
never been and never will be anything less than the brethren except when we
personally do not keep the commandments we each made at baptism. Every
ordinance that the sisters of the church receive are the exact same ordinances
that the men receive, except for the Priesthood. You do not understand in the
slightest degree your role as a Daughter of your Heavenly Father if you think
and believe that His daughters need to be ordained to the Priesthood. You are
greatly perverting the ways of the Lord and His church, and remember that this
is Jesus Christ's church. If you have a problem with the way it is run then
you need to take it to the head of the this church. That person is Jesus
Christ. How very sad that you claim to love and obey Jesus Christ (baptism
covenants that are to be renewed every Sunday during the Sacrament) and yet you
are telling Him by your words and actions that you do not follow Him at all. I
pray that you will understand your worth as women.

cougarsare1Las Vegas, NV

Sept. 24, 2013 4:11 p.m.

Great corollaries: Elders and High Priests. You can die an Elder as an old man
and still receive all the same blessings as one who was a High Priest. A woman
can die an old woman and still receive ALL of the same blessings as a man who
was a High Priest. So how is Sister Kelly not on the same spiritual footing as
men who hold the priesthood?

Finally, what she is seeking is not
equal spiritual footing, but equal administrative footing. And even if the Lord
saw fit to have women be ordained to the priesthood, we all know how He feels
about those who aspire to leadership positions.

Amen to Sister Skaggs
and her comments. And thank the Lord that the vast majority of the membership
of the Church shares her views. It is unfortunate that such a small, nay,
miniscule number commands as much attention as they have garnered.

Aephelps14San Luis Obispo, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 4:10 p.m.

As a female member of the LDS church, I don't feel the need to hold the
priesthood, but I do think that the fact that men hold the priesthood can
sometimes create a sense of inequality in the mind of men and women in the
church and that leaks into how the church is run in unfortunate ways. What needs
to be rectified here is the attitude of individuals and not necessarily
doctrine. However, I think that if you don't ask, nothing will change. Who
are we to say that women won't ever hold the priesthood? God's
thoughts are not our thoughts.

dasha!Provo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:08 p.m.

Someone asked "when did this Kelly lady in the article become the Prophet of
the Lord?" And others have been shocked that women are "demanding to get
the priesthood." From all I've read/heard about this group of women, no
one is "demanding" anything. They are simply expressing their feelings
of wanting/hoping for the priesthood for women and are only asking the prophet
(which none of them claims to be) to take their question/supplication to the
Lord on their behalf. Because, although someone else suggested they pray
directly to God about it and stop bothering all of us with it, they can and
I'm sure they do pray about it...but any revelation about it will come only
through the prophet, and so he must ask. This is how the priesthood being
extended to blacks came about through President Kimball...he had to beseech for
a long time, not just sit around waiting for the revelation to drop on him. Why
don't women now have the priesthood? Prophets and apostles have said,
"We don't know why," so how 'bout we stop our speculating.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:08 p.m.

If they just want to hear the message... there are several ways they can hear
and see what is said 1. watch it live in their chapel, 2. watch the
rebroadcast, 2. download the audio or video from the AppleStore, 4.
read it in the church magazines the next month... there's no secrets.

My question is... why would an activist need to be in the building and
not use any of these other sources (unless they want to disrupt the actual
meeting).

Disrupting the meeting is not a good thing IMO or something
the church must allow. If you want to protest... protest OUTSIDE and make your
point, but don't ruin it for everybody else by being disruptive and ruining
the spirit of the meeting.

If the activists just want to enjoy the
message... use one of the methods above (Note: 99% of the members of the church
will get the message by one of these methods, not by being present in the Conf
Center).

Bottom line... If you are there to disrupt the meeting...
they don't have to allow that.

okeesmokeeSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:05 p.m.

When the Nazis wanted to march in Skokie, Ill, the Jewish community raised quite
a stink and attempted to prevent the march. In the end, the Nazis prevailed,
and then decided not to march, but appreciated the publicity gained by the
protests. These "activists" have no desire to hear what is said at the
LDS Priesthood meeting, but want and desire publicity for their cause. I
don't know what the correct answer is, but I would guess this would have
fizzled had they been given tickets. All they want is attention and
unfortunately, they are getting it.

E.SBountiful, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 4:04 p.m.

To atl134:

The decision to give the priesthood for men ONLY was made
by God, not men. The decision of giving the the gift of pregnancy to women ONLY
was made by God. So, where is the difference?

In this Church you
either trust the prophets and revelation, or you don't. And if you do not
trust them, you basically will not have much future in here...It is purely a
matter of testimony, not gender.

flynn is the coolestSan Diego, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 3:59 p.m.

Kate Kelly is asking the wrong question. Rather than ask "why can't
women have the priesthood?" she should be asking, "Is there such a thing
as priesthood, and does the LDS church have it?" If the LDS church
doesn't have the priesthood, women are being denied nothing. If the LDS
church does indeed have the priesthood, then the church also has the authority
to administer said priesthood. Can she not see the conundrum? If this is such a
sticking point for her, why not join some other religion where women are allowed
to be ministers?

dasha!Provo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:50 p.m.

Also, some said only men who are asked to speak at women's/young
women's meetings go to them (though we know it's more than just those
who go). And yet others even suggested maybe letting a woman or two speak at
priesthood session would "suffice." Well, here again is a stark
difference: women are not only not invited to speak or even give a prayer at
priesthood session, they cannot even be in the building as part of the tech crew
(cameras, audio, lights, ushers). That's how ridiculous the "no women
at priesthood" practice/edict is. Please, someone, explain this, esp. since
women (and even nonmembers) have been able to read about or watch the priesthood
proceedings after the fact--and now they will be transmitted live)...so what has
been, and continues to be, the problem with letting women into the
meeting/building itself? It simply makes no sense.

dasha!Provo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:47 p.m.

To "Big D" and a couple others who commented on my first post...I did
not say men were 'clamoring" to get into Women's and Young
Women's conferences, etc. I said that there are those who want to and do
attend (your "NO man goes to those" is bogus...I personally know of men
who have gone/do go and have heard from plenty of others that they know of or
have seen men attending). Why they want to go is beyond me...maybe they feel
some sense of patriarchy or obligation as head of the family to know what's
being said/taught to their wives/daughters (though they could also find out
other ways, and after the fact, same as women can do re: priesthood session).
The point is that they CAN go. No one's going to dare stop men from walking
through the doors to one of the women's meetings. That's the
difference here.

LMBEANSANDY, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:47 p.m.

These women need to get a life!!!!!!!!

hermountsPleasanton, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 3:44 p.m.

Do those women go to priesthood meeting in their wards? I doubt it.

jeanie orem, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:43 p.m.

This issue rolls around every so often with a new zealous group leading the
charge. I guess we should be glad they have not chained themselves to the gates
at Temple Square or shouted "no" during the sustaining of our current
prophet like the group during the ERA movement did. I imagine this will go down
in history having had the same results as other "well- intentioned"
women demanding equality in the LDS church. (Will they wear pants to the
Priesthood session?)

There are so many other ways for women to serve.
Women having the priesthood is not the hill to die on if serving others, like
men get to, is really the motivation.

TOOSanpete, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:39 p.m.

This is getting ridiculous.

Look ladies. The meeting is for men. Do
you have the priesthood? No. How would you like it if I went to the conference
center for the Relief Society meeting and took a seat with my dad and brothers,
and you were unable to attend? There are a finite amount of seats. They
are reserved for men--for whom the meeting is addressed. Stop proclaiming
unfairness. I'd be super worried about this if I were you. This is
boarder line apostasy in my opinion.

runnergirl154chubbuck, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 3:35 p.m.

Sorry Kate Kelly but this is just wrong. Don't do this. Men and women are
different and have different responsibilities. This is just wrong, wrong,
wrong. I'm all for girl power, but this protest leaves me with a sick
feeling in my stomach.

NoCoolName_TomLafayette, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 3:35 p.m.

Thank, Richard. If I hear one more time how "Priesthood = motherhood"
or how the current system is in place because it reflects the eternal
differences between men and women I may just explode. There is NO PROOF for
these assertions in anything official. FAIR has the following from in their
pamphlet "What Is 'Official' Doctrine?":

Harold B.
Lee expressed similar thoughts when he taught that any doctrine, advanced by
anyone—regardless of position—that was not supported by the standard
works, then “you may know that his statement is merely his private
opinion.” He recognized that the Prophet could bring forth new doctrine,
but “when he does, [he] will declare it as revelation from God,”
after which it will be sustained by the body of Church. The Prophet can add to
the scriptures, but such new additions are presented by the First Presidency to
the body of the Church and are accepted by common consent (by sustaining vote)
as binding doctrine of the Church (See D&C 26:2; 107:27-31).

Everyone needs to STOP repeating their own assumptions beyond the simple
"I don't know why things are the way they are." Seriously.

IMAPatriot2PLEASANT GROVE, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:34 p.m.

"we want to go to priesthood meeting so we can show our leaders that we are
ready for both the benefits and responsibilities of the priesthood."

This statement alone shows that this person isn't ready for any
Church calling. She lacks not only an understanding of priesthood leadership in
the Church, she also lacks an appreciation of her role as a woman and/or mother.
Actually, she is as close to apostate as it gets. She is ignoring true
doctrine, as found in the scriptures, and is trying to supplant that with her
own ideas and doctrine. The Savior clearly taught that contention is not of God
but from the author of all sin. I would advise this lady, and her associates,
to repent before it is too late.

DCHewBounti, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:32 p.m.

I think that women forcing the prophet to ordain women to the priesthood will
teach God that he is out of touch with today's feminist movement. When will
Gd ever learn!@#

scripture powerHerriman, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:32 p.m.

It is very important to me, when I am ill or need a special blessing, that I
receive this action from my family members. I know their spiritual power. They
hold the priesthood. They have the power to call upon the Lord for His will to
be done in my life. When a grandson does not have his father available for
attendance to a priesthood meeting, another priesthood holder steps up and
accompanies him to the session. I wonder how Ms. Kelly can sing the beautiful
songs that for years have testifies to the Lord's love and continuous
guiding of our lives here on earth and then question the truthfulness of the
plan of our church. It is laid out in the D&C very carefully if one but
read it and prayed about it. Why would anyone think they know more than the Lord
on how our church is governor? Does she think she is smarter than the Lord.
What a responsibility she has taken on her shoulders to tell the Lord what to
do. It isn't the leadership that is telling her no, it is the Lord.

RSLfanalwaysWest Valley, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:30 p.m.

Almost every preisthood conference that I been to in a stake center there have
been women in watching it. I know that some did it to watch it with their
son's since maybe their father could not come or they did't have a
father. I do not see any problem with women watching it.

tylert73West Valley, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:29 p.m.

I am at the same time amused and annoyed by the comments of those who are
obviously not members of the LDS church. They don't understand the
structure or organization of the church at all. They don't even know what
the Priesthood really is, but they are outraged that women don't have it.
They try to be experts on a subject they know nothing about, assuming the church
and the world can even come close to being a good comparison.

skepticPhoenix, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 3:27 p.m.

If the LDS church incorporates prejudice and discrimination towards women then
it should forfeit its nonprofit corporation tax exempt status. That is Gods and
Americas way.

mammalouSomewhere in the USA, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:23 p.m.

Utah Native "Our Grandmothers and many of our mothers never sat down for
dinner until their husband was comfortable and well fed"

Just
so you know, I love to feed my family and not sit down until they have all been
cared for and in no was is that subservient. I also love when my gas tank has
been filled, my lawns mowed, the weeds sprayed and the farming done by my
boys.And I even work outside of my home and have my own money and credit cards,
I do this not because I'm told but because I love my role, and they love
theirs. This is the problem I have with this whole movement, how dare you think
only your way to correct or "unsubservient". I live the role I live
because I choose, you are free to live how you want but how dare you think it
wrong because you don't agree. Bigotry works both ways.

yomommaWhitehouse, OH

Sept. 24, 2013 3:22 p.m.

I personally feel that if these sisters truly believed that they will follow the
will of the Lord in their request, the request would never have been made in the
first place. The will of the Lord is plain. The blacks didn't stand on
the temple grounds requesting to be let in. It happened in the Lord's
time. There were no protests, no disobedience, and no forums, blogs, or other
public media set up to publish their desires. If these sisters truly wanted to
know the will of the Lord, they would not leave it up to the priesthood to tell
them, they would go directly to the Lord and ask. He does still hear and answer
prayers. I suppose next they will be wanting to allow the church to marry same
sex couples. Just take a good look at the Community of Christ, formerly known
as the Reorganized Church. They have women holding the priesthood and
performing all priesthood duties and are now marrying same sex couples just to
appease the masses. They are dwindling every day in membership. I personally
do not need to hold the priesthood to feel whole.

BastiatarianTUCSON, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 3:19 p.m.

@Well.ok

Exactly! I've found that sisters who are all gung-ho
about getting the Priesthood have absolutely NO idea what that entails.
There's nothing glamorous about being a faithful Priesthood holder.
It's a sacred privilege and an honor, yes, but if one is truly doing his
duty, it's also a heavy, endless, thankless grind, even WITHOUT the
enormous added burden of being an EQ president, HP Group leader, Bishop, Stake
President, or General Authority.

Do you really want MORE meetings?
MORE phone calls late at night? MORE time spent away from home and family after
an already long, hard day? MORE responsibility to try to get slothful members to
start carrying their weight? MORE experiences having your heart ripped out as
you listen to a young man or woman confess serious sins? MORE time realizing
that no matter what you say or do, somebody in the ward is going to be mad?

What I'm saying doesn't diminish the role and impact of the
sisters in any way whatsoever. All I'm saying is, in the words of The
Maestro, "Be careful what you wish for. You might find what you fear."

runnergirl154chubbuck, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 3:13 p.m.

Sorry Kate Kelly but I feel that you and your group are in the wrong.
Don't do this. It's wrong to even ask for tickets. Are you kidding
me? I'm all for girl power, but this is just wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong.
I think you can focus your energy somewhere else.

Richard CraniumMesa, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 3:12 p.m.

I agree with @NoCoolName_Tom about people using "non-doctirnal" excuses
to back up a claim. We have all heard them, some of those excuses are used in
these comments. The use of these excuses belittles us all, so please stop.

Where I disagree with this group is that the premise of their protest is
that the church leaders have it wrong and need to plead with God to get a
correction. I'm not suggesting that the prophets are infallible, just not
wrong. I also take issue with the way this group is protesting. The appropriate
channel for this would be to make requests with their local bishop and stake
president, not to hold a press conference on the doorstep of the Conference
center for all the world to see. As if popular opinion will force the Lord to
change this.

"Cursed are all those that shall lift up the heel
against mine anointed, saith the Lord, and cry they have sinned when they have
not sinned before me, saith the Lord, but have done that which was meet in mine
eyes, and which I commanded them." D&C 121:16

tylert73West Valley, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:11 p.m.

There are things with the church that I have questioned in my lifetime. As I
have prayed and studied, I have come to the conclusion over and over again that
the church is true and those at its head will never lead us astray. I take that
seriously. We all have questions and doubts, which is natural, and we are
encouraged to sort those out. But as Elder Holland said last conference "In
the church, what we know always trumps what we do not know." If you have
issues or doubts about the church doctrine or leadership, when you are giving
more attention to those doubts or criticism than to just living the gospel the
way you should, you are on the road to losing your testimony.

Meadow Lark MarkIDAHO FALLS, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 3:11 p.m.

My question is when did this Kelly lady in the article become the Prophet of the
Lord? Who ordained her the prophet? When did this happen and why did I not
know about it? She seems to feel she knows best what women need and don't
need. Her stance, to me, shows a extreme amount of arrogance on her part--to
assume that she knows what is best for women of The Church of Jesus Christ of
Latter-day Saints. Isn't that President Monson's job as the prophet?
At least that is what I believe.

Apocalypse pleaseBluffdale, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:08 p.m.

I can think of two other times in the past where social pressure brought about
positive change.

Utah NativeFarmington, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 3:03 p.m.

Obedience is the first law of the gospel, and a person ordained to the
priesthood must be obedient to God's laws in order to use that priesthood
power (to bless others, never for himself, by the way). These protesting women
need to seek first to obey the counsel of the Lord rather than counsel Him, and
through obedience to His ways develop their own testimonies of how He operates.

no fit in SGSt.George, Utah

Sept. 24, 2013 3:00 p.m.

@Well ok,You are right in the sense that it would be extremely interesting
watching men having to change rolls. How many LDS men would agree to be
the mom at home, and the mom at work outside of the home? How many of
these Priesthood holders would be willing to continually make certain everything
is perfect in their homes, and in the life of the "newest" Priesthood
holder?How would they handle a frequently absent spouse?Our
Grandmothers and many of our mothers never sat down for dinner until their
husband was comfortable and well fed(not to mention everything else they had to
accomplish in their subservient roll).Anyone see a male doing this?

kim cDFW, TX

Sept. 24, 2013 2:56 p.m.

As a woman, I am so confused where these feelings of being "less-than"
or "unequal to men" come from. God created men and women. He decided
that men were to be ordained with His power. Jesus Christ established His
church on the earth. We have a prophet of God who leads and guides our church
in accordance to the will of God. I trust that God knows best and that He has a
plan. I would ask Kate Kelly why she feels the need to stage a political point
when what's at hand is spiritual in nature. If you have a question about
something the Lord has designated or His prophet has said, ask God. Study the
scriptures and words of the prophets. Maybe even after all that, you won't
feel like you completely understand. Maybe that is when you choose to have
faith. I don't claim to understand everything about the Gospel or previous
revelations. I am pretty sure I won't in this life. But I know God loves
me and cares for me as He does all of us and I trust that He will answer all my
questions in His time.

lumanwaltersplano, TN

Sept. 24, 2013 2:52 p.m.

The sexism I am seeing here is jaw dropping. I can't believe these are
adults who are still gripping to gender roles. Where is people's common
sense? You don't even have to be smart to figure out that you can't
paint people with broad brush(as the people against women's ordination are
doing here).

This isn't a cry for attention. Was the march from
selma to montgommerry a cry for attention? Was susan b anthony just crying for
attention? On the streets of saigon when a monk doused himself in gas, sat on
the street in the lotus position and set himself a blaze, was that just an
act??? What about on the national mall 50 years ago? Were those people just cry
babies? Tell me, do you think they just misguided? They had their seats like
everybody else, just in the back of the bus so what were they complaining about
right?That's how you guys sound to me. All I see from the people defending
the church is hate hate hate, fear fear fear.

Apocalypse pleaseBluffdale, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:52 p.m.

I have a feeling that sometime in the future when women get the priesthood we
will look back and shake our heads at all this. Kind of like the way we look at
blacks and the priesthood now. I would imagine in the future that the official
position for denying women the priesthood will also be similar: we don't
know why that happened.

San Diego Chargers FanSan Diego, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 2:52 p.m.

I will be so happy when women can finally take over the jobs of scoutmaster,
bishopric, ward clerk and home teacher. Then I can stay home and play video
games. I can finally work on my golf swing. I can then go to the beach more
and let somebody else deal with all those responsibilities.

O'reallyIdaho Falls, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 2:48 p.m.

If men and women are supposed to be exactly equal in all things in the church, I
would get a good laugh at men trying to be Primary, YW or RS presidents.

People, we are given different responsibilities for a reason. Think
about it! And some prayer wouldn't hurt either.

MediumHarrisProvo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:40 p.m.

Good to see some positive changes lately as the result of bringing issues up
with church leadership. There is room for faithful agitation while waiting for
further revelation in the church. And we all benefit from it.

BastiatarianTUCSON, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 2:40 p.m.

>self-respect

Every attempt to pressure/guilt/threaten the First
Presidency into changing doctrine/policy/practice in the Church is wholly and
firmly SELF-centered, regardless of which navel-gazing mob has decided to create
God in its own image. It's about personal pet issues rather than serving
God.

A "respectful request" to God's anointed is not
made by forming a pressure group and making a spectacle of yourSELF. Attempting
to attend the Priesthood Session when you know you can't makes it vividly
clear that it's merely a publicity stunt designed to draw attention to
yourSELF.

Let's say that a man is a faithful, worthy, and active
Elder, but that most men his age are High Priests. Should he lose
"self-respect" because of that? Or because he teaches Nursery instead of
being called to be Bishop? My sacred covenant is to do the Lord's will,
whenever, wherever, and however HE stipulates. It's not about ME.

Whether one is a man or a woman, dependence--to any degree--on a calling or
position for "self-respect" suggests deeper issues that should be
resolved before considering taking on more responsibility.

HamathOmaha, NE

Sept. 24, 2013 2:38 p.m.

@ Riversoffunand others who think not having the priesthood means being
left out..

Marxist is right. At least here in Omaha, generally more
balance exists in the church where men hold the priesthood than outside of it.
Women and men both share administrative duties in the church. For instance,
when the Bishop wants to help someone with some Welfare need, he does so only
after a home visit is conducted under the direction of a women in the Relief
Society.

Local examples... As the Cubmaster, I, a man, report
directly to the Primary President, a women. Male 11 year old scout leaders do
the same. Women, in a similar fashion report to men who preside over the Sunday
School. During the last move in the ward, the Elders quorum ran under the
guidance and direction of the Relief Society because they had a stronger
connection to the individual being moved. A young women conducted the last
joint youth activity and the time before it was conducted by a young man.

WesleyZufeltPueblo West, CO

Sept. 24, 2013 2:37 p.m.

The Priesthood is everlasting. The Saviour, Moses, and Elias gave the keys to
Peter, James, and John, on the mount, when they were transfigured before him.
The Priesthood is everlasting—without beginning of days or end of
years—without father, mother, &c. If there is no change of ordinances,
there is no change of Priesthood. Wherever the ordinances of the Gospel are
administered, there is the Priesthood.

How have we come at the
Priesthood in the last days? It came down, down, in regular succession. Peter,
James, and John had it given to them, and they gave it to others. Christ is the
Great High Priest; Adam next. Paul speaks of the Church coming to an innumerable
company of angels; to God, the Judge of all—the spirits of just men made
perfect; to Jesus, the Mediator of the new covenant, &c. (Heb xii. 23.)

President JOSEPH SMITH, in Commerce, Illinois, Tuesday, June 2, 1839.

ZoniezoobieMesa, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 2:36 p.m.

I think alot of fathers won't want to give up the tradition of attending
with their young sons, or going out for ice cream afterwards!

There
may be alot of ice cream businesses that suffer from the loss of that twice
annual crowd after priesthood, especially along the Wasatch Front. Let's
hope not.

As for me, I enjoy watching the messages on the Relief
Society and Young Women broadcasts, but I wouldn't want to attend in
person..those are special meetings for mothers and daughters as well.

O'reallyIdaho Falls, ID

Sept. 24, 2013 2:34 p.m.

Those women are so hard up!! Yes, I'm judging them. What a stupid waste of
energy. Don't they know they can read the priesthood talks in The Ensign
magazine if they are so curious? I don't believe they really care at all
about what is spoken in that meeting. Their presence will only detract from the
spirit of the meeting because it's done only to make a show of themselves.
It's a selfish motive. And anything done in selfishness in this fashion is
detrimental to self and others.

I believe they will one day be sorry
for the fuss they're making.

QuercusQateWasatch Co., UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:26 p.m.

I believe women miss out on a great many blessings by not having the priesthood.
I remember how chagrined I felt (on my mission) when I didn't have the
honor of conferring the Holy Ghost upon new converts I had taught. I wanted to
be able to lay my hands on their heads and speak my heart to them. Similarly,
I've wanted to be able to anoint and pray for the sick.

Women
also have a disadvantage because they can't hold leadership positions over
the congregations. Women would make excellent bishops and administrators in the
LDS Church. Indeed, not being able to administrate even while being a full
tithe-payer is akin to "taxation without representation," something the
US colonists justifiably protested.

Daughter of Godslc, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:22 p.m.

To many get distracted with things that do not pertain to our salvation. The
time that could be used to become closer to our Heavenly Father and Jesus
Christ, Is being used for this. It is by satin's design to distract many
members in other things. If the time that is being spent towards this
"goal" was being used to draw nearer to God, They would be much better
off. Instead Satin has got them distracted with something else. This makes me
sad. They are using valuable time that could be spent with family, pondering
scriptures or doing missionary work. Instead they are causing contention and
distracting our brethren at the priesthood session. To me it is no different
then the protestors that yell and scream at us, as we are walking in general
conference. It is distracting from the purpose and spirit. The session should be
used as a time to gain strength for the brethren, just as we as women gain
strength at the general relief society meetings. Don't lose focus on the
purpose.

trueblue75USA, NC

Sept. 24, 2013 2:20 p.m.

Obedience seems to shout in my ears....and listen to what we learn in
primary..."Follow the Prophet"...if and when the Lord wants women to
hold the priesthood in the way these women seem to think they need it, He will
be the one to say so. I for one LDS woman have plenty to do in my role as
woman, wife, mother, grandmother and servant in the Lord's kingdom...and
add find great joy and satisfaction doing so. I agree with what someone said
earlier, 'these women are totally confused or mis-lead.'... The Lord
is in control of His kingdom;-)

The RockFederal Way, WA

Sept. 24, 2013 2:19 p.m.

"The ordination of women would put us all on equal spiritual footing with
our brethren, and nothing less will suffice."

Wow. The church is
either run by God or by men. The last time somebody decided to impose their will
on God it did not end well. It resulted in a war in heaven.

God has
His reasons for ordering His kingdom as He does. Most are humble enough to
accept that. There is no comparison between this and extending the priesthood to
all worthy male members. That had long been foretold and expected. This has not.

Bored to the point of THIS!Ogden, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:18 p.m.

Women who want the Priesthood should petition God, not the LDS Church for
permission! God has set forth the guidelines.

atl134Salt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:10 p.m.

@ES"Men pleading for the right of getting pregnant?"

There's a difference between a gender difference that is purely
biological and something that current medical technology can't even deal
with... and a gender difference set up that way through decisions of men.

first2thirdElmo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 2:08 p.m.

What man wants to go to the general relief society meeting? You couldn't
find 5 much less 150 wanting to go to another meeting.

katkocoAurora, CO

Sept. 24, 2013 2:05 p.m.

The Women of the church (18+) have General Relief Society meeting next Saturday
(men and boys are not invited - except those who may be speaking). The Young
Women (12-18) of the church have their General YW meeting in March (men and boys
are not invited - except those who may be speaking). The men and boys (12+)
will have their Priesthood meeting on April 6th --- WHY should women and girls
feel they should be invited!!!! And, I personally do not have any desire to
hold the Priesthood. I like benefiting from it, but feel no need to bare it.

RGBuena Vista, VA

Sept. 24, 2013 1:59 p.m.

I have long believed that men do not have certain roles in the Church because
they have the priesthood; but rather,they are given the priesthood to fulfill
their roles. Nor is priesthood a "consolation prize" to men who are
otherwise less worthy than women, and also not able to bear children. Nor is
priesthood given to men to shape them up to be as good as women already are.
Jesus was a priesthood holder. Rather, the priesthood helps men fulfill their
roles. Women have equally important roles. And the Lord wants all of our talents
to be put to good use.

riverofsunSt.George, Utah

Sept. 24, 2013 1:58 p.m.

LDS males, again, year after year, decade after decade, repeat their
statement......"Woman and Mothers are just as important as the
Priesthood". Quite the complement, eh?Will there ever be more than
just this very old, bland statement? Women deserve a much more detailed
explanation. Other religions have had great success with women sharing the
administrative duties.Detailed information and a new, modern act of faith
would speak much louder than these repetitive words.

marxistSalt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:55 p.m.

It's hard to explain the LDS setup to my friends on the left outside of the
church. There is a whole lot more "balance of power" between the
genders in the church than is generally understood outside of it.

1aggieSALT LAKE CITY, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:54 p.m.

If there are doctrinal reason for such practices as excluding women from some
meetings, not allowing them to be Sunday School Presidents, segregating men from
women in the temple, etc., I'd like to hear them. Otherwise I'm
inclined to think many of the practices currently observed are the result of
arbitrary decisions of (fallible) old men (just as excluding blacks from holding
the priesthood appears to have been). Therefore I welcome a certain amount of
"agitation".

oldschoolerUSA, TX

Sept. 24, 2013 1:53 p.m.

Women cannot have the priesthood. Do not agree with it? ask God, he made it that
way, no discussion. Do not attempt to change the order of thing and adjust to
"modern life".

TruthseekerSLO, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 1:49 p.m.

Re:dasha

Amen!Thank you.

It is ridiculous that women
who want to attend, would be turned away. Likewise, if men wanted to attend the
women's conf/broadcast they should be allowed to do so as well.

Big 'D'San Mateo, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 1:43 p.m.

Dasha--Find me one man clamoring to attend the RS and YW conference
meetings! LOL!!! News flash-- no men attend these meetings (except for a
couple of the speakers), and NONE CARE! Perhaps to make things equal, they
could invite a female to speak at the priesthood meeting.That would
actually break things up a bit and make it even more interesting and
entertaining than it already is!

Well.okLehi, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:42 p.m.

I think it would be great to see women get the priesthood, but these women
petitioning for it better be careful for what they wish for. You will now be
expected to participate in the most time consuming and difficult callings in the
church (bishopric, high council, stake presidency), be called on at any time to
give a priesthood blessing, be commanded to serve a mission, and be commanded to
lead your family in daily prayer, scripture study, FHE, and temple attendence.

Open Minded MormonEverett, 00

Sept. 24, 2013 1:39 p.m.

I have no problems with it.

In fact, I'm so old, I
remember when Women couldn't even give opening or closing prayers in
Sacrament meetings.

The one thing I love about living in a
"Progressive" Church, is the progress we see from time to time.

Johnny TriumphAmerican Fork, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:38 p.m.

@Ohio-LDS - I am in no way demeaning your parenting or how you love your
children and have not said as much. If I speak with clear conscience and
accurately and truthfully I must praise my wife for her God-given ability to
love and to nurture. I seek to emulate that ability but it does not come
naturally to me. You and I both seek to love and nurture our children, I'm
sure, but women have an innate ability to do so. And it's not that men are
'inferior' to women in that regard, just very, very different in
ability. Men and women both bring different talents to a home; when combined
those talents produce amazing results. If we embrace the God-given abilities
that we have we can look for ways to grow.

And please don't take
offense at this, but for me to deny that women have a God-given ability to love
and nurture is just demeaning to the most important people in my life. I refuse
to demean my wife in such a way and rather choose to celebrate those abilities.

DorisGilbert, AZ

Sept. 24, 2013 1:30 p.m.

Abiding the Lord's will and His timing is the essence of faith and
testimony. This is His Church and he is at the head, if we are to doubt His
ability to oversee His work then we must question all of our beliefs. There
seems to be an equivocation being the priesthood authority and the priesthood
holder the one coming from God the other one imperfect. This agitating of which
they speak is the equivalent to a tamper tantrum. They certainly do not
represent the majority of LDS women who, as it has been pointed out in the
article “are at peace with how the Lord has chosen to establish his
kingdom upon the earth” . The voiced discontent finds it seedbed in other
issues of varying natures

E.SBountiful, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:22 p.m.

"We consider ourselves to be prospective elders, and we want to go to
priesthood meeting so we can learn to be good priesthood holders, because we
believe that time is coming. That is our focus."

This is totally
ridiculous...What comes next? Men pleading for the right of getting pregnant?

Californian#1@94131San Francisco, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 1:19 p.m.

"To me, agitating on the issue is a question of self-respect," she (Kate
Kelly, the activist) said.

"The ordination of women would put us
all on equal spiritual footing with our brethren, and nothing less will
suffice."

I am sorry she feels her spiritual footing to be
inferior to the brothers' based on not having the priesthood. Where does
that leave the people who always find their talents being put to use as a ward
librarian, finance clerk, or PFR? Can they claim they are being denied the same
spiritual footing as those called as Sunday school teachers? Isn't our
spiritual footing based on our own relationship with the Lord?

Then
she turns around and says it is God's priesthood & we operate on His
timetable.

So which is it: have faith in His timetable or pray for
greater faith in it if necessary, or agitate for Him to change it by publicly
lobbying His prophets?

vangroovinWest Jordan, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:15 p.m.

This is the Lord's church, not man's, not woman's. The First
President and the Quorum of the Twelve Apostles have all the rights and keys to
the priesthood. They exercise those rights and keys according to the will of
the Lord, not of man/woman/interest group(s). The current organization of the
priesthood is that worthy males may receive and exercise their respective
priesthood office (e.g. a worthy 12 year-old boy can be ordained to the Aaronic
Priesthood to the office of deacon). If there are questions and concerns in our
testimonies regarding the organization of the Church or the doctrine of Christ
as outline in the scriptures, we need to search out the answers from the Lord if
what He has taught us is true and right or we may find ourselves wandering down
strange roads away from the tree of life or the love of God. The road to
apostasy begins when we attempt to make exceptions to the gospel standards or
when we seek to push our own personal agendas. "Seek ye the kingdom of
God" (see Luke 12:13-34).

Ohio-LDSNE, OH

Sept. 24, 2013 1:11 p.m.

@Johnny Triumph,

When it comes to my children, you are simply wrong.
I love them in the same way and to the same degree that my wife does. My love
and ability to nurture are not superior to hers. But they are not inferior
either. She and I do have differences in parental approach, personal
preferences, and personal strengths. But those differences are temporary and
evolving. Our love and ability to nurture are eternal. And it is shared
equally between us. Please stop demeaning me and other men who love their
children by claiming that our love is inferior to that of women.

2 bitsCottonwood Heights, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:08 p.m.

Dennis,You are really REALLY stretching to find an issue. I think the
confused look on your face is more pretend than real.

Young men
don't have to attend with their father. They don't have to attend at
the Conference Center. They can attend in their local meeting house. They can
watch at home. Many young men attend and sit with their friends even though
their father is also there. They can attend alone, they can attend with their
friends and their fathers, they can attend with their home teacher. If he
wants to attend at his local meeting house and watch the live broadcast I
presume he could bring his mother (if he needs a chaperone to sit with him and
nobody else will do).

If his father died I don't think there
would be any REAL shortage of opportunity for him to attend. Many 12 year olds
attend weekly meetings without either of their parents. It's not that big
a deal.

If he really can't attend... he can read the talks in
the church magazines, or download the video or audio from the AppleStore and
watch it on his phone.

mammalouSomewhere in the USA, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:06 p.m.

If you truly are interested in being a female preisthood holder then the LDS
church is not the church for you.It goes against most everything you are taught.
You can not believe in the church and think men and women should be the
same.This does not make women unequal, it means we have different God given
roles.There are many churches that offer "priesthood type" roles for
females, if that is truly want you feel is right why not go join one of them.
If we want equality, that means letting others run things the way the see fit
even when we disagree. There is a place in the world for all kinds. That's
why there is more than one religon. I don't think you can believe the
church true, and still demand to be like the males, it just doesn't work.
I for one relish my role as a woman amd mother in the church that is why I
belong to the LDS church, if I wanted to be a female preist or pastor I would
join a church that offered me that. Get a grip people!!!

Lone Star CougarPlano, TX

Sept. 24, 2013 1:06 p.m.

What will she do if the church respectfully declines her request?

May
I suggest that possibly women are in nature more Christ-like and that God has
given the Priesthood to men to teach them to be more Christ-like.

geekgregKanab, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:05 p.m.

Whatever the commentators may say about the specifics of this situation, I just
wanted to say this is a fine article and is well written. It presents both sides
and doesn't demonize anybody. Good job.

dasha!Provo, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 1:03 p.m.

Let's just speak to the request by some women to attend the priesthood
session. In the past the priesthood session was available to read or watch after
the fact (by anyone, including women, nonmembers, etc.) and now it is going to
be available live on TV and online, also by anyone. So the argument that
"It's a meeting only for priesthood holders" obviously doesn't
hold water, does it? So why shouldn't women also be able to physically be
in attendance at the meeting? And the argument that women would be taking up
seats that men could (or should) be filling also doesn't follow (esp. now
that men can watch it live on TV/online themselves as well).

And if
you still want to illogically hold up those two arguments for why women
shouldn't be allowed into priesthood session, then, OK...let's also
stop letting men into the women's and young women's conferences since,
by the same logic, those meetings are for women/young women only and men
shouldn't be taking up seats that women/young women should be sitting in.

ShushannahKendal, Cumbria

Sept. 24, 2013 1:00 p.m.

The Lord proffers the invitation to attend priesthood meetings... perhaps this
handful of daughters should petition Him for admittance, and let the brethren
get on with learning how they can best improve the help they can offer the
brothers and sisters they serve in their respective units...

Johnny TriumphAmerican Fork, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 12:57 p.m.

@Ohio-LDS - Women have an inherent ability to love that men just don't
have. That does not mean that I do not love my children, it's just in a
different way than women can. I agree with you that I relish my role as a
parent. But to say I have the same abilities as my wife is shortsighted and
demeaning to her. I value what she has to offer and count myself as very lucky
to have those abilities in our home, much like I hope she values what I bring.
Our inherent traits are God-given and we should value them and the ways they can
benefit our homes. As a man, I am sad that you cannot recognize that men and
women both bring essential qualities to the home, and that you feel you can
replicate your wife's talents and abilities.

Zyn ManHenderson, NV

Sept. 24, 2013 12:56 p.m.

These women are misguided and do not understand that they do not need to hold
the priesthood to have all of the blessings that the preisthood provides. It
seems more of an attention getter. And it seems to me that it is treading on
areas that may question whether these women should be allowed to remain members
of the church. Akin to those who follow poligamy.

RanchHere, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 12:56 p.m.

The sexism on this thread is apparent. Just wow you guys. Wow.

NoCoolName_TomLafayette, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 12:55 p.m.

@FrankSegesman, are you seriously suggesting that someone should leave the only
true Church with the authority to perform the necessary ordinances that pertain
to salvation and exaltation and thus be doomed to an eternity in a lesser
kingdom never to achieve her full potential merely because she holds an opinion
you disagree with? Because, even if you meant it flippantly, that's
exactly what you are saying Kate kelly should do.

WookieOmaha, NE

Sept. 24, 2013 12:54 p.m.

Such actions have a potential to be a slippery slope. I'm glad that this
is His Church and His Order for His Kingdom. I have faith in this statement.

Godspeed and God Bless All

NoCoolName_TomLafayette, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 12:53 p.m.

The LDS Priesthood is not a zero-sum game. Giving women the Priesthood
doesn't lessen a man's connection to God.

Let's be
rational about this: we can all agree that there is a reason why *all* worthy
men in the Church are expected to receive the Priesthood, right? The Church
could still operate if the old rules of the Levitical Priesthood were still in
effect and only a select few had it. So there has to be some benefit to all
non-Black men having the Priesthood, right? And in 1978 everyone was
(justifiably) overjoyed that Priesthood blessings could be extended to *all*
worthy men. Why was there such happiness at this change? Because there are
*benefits* to having more Priesthood holders. So if we follow this through to
it's natural conclusion, what benefits are these that would somehow *not*
be expressed that much more if all worthy people held the Priesthood?

NoCoolName_TomLafayette, CA

Sept. 24, 2013 12:52 p.m.

I hate how LDS members tend to retreat to *non-doctrinal* explanations for why
things are the way they are. You can't find proof that women are "more
spiritual" than men in the Standard Works. You won't find proof that a
mother's love is somehow equivalent to Priesthood in the Standard Works.
You won't find that most popular of folk doctrines that motherhood is the
equivalent to Priesthood in the statements of Thomas S. Monson since he became
President of the Church. You won't find the explanation that men *need*
the Priesthood because they are so much more deficient than women in the
Temple.

Let's all step back a bit from the standard,
unscriptural, unofficial, undoctrinal rhetoric and state all that *can* be said
on the subject: It is possible that at some future date women *could* be given
the Priesthood, and the reason why that future date isn't the here-and-now
is *unknown*. Seriously, isn't that the standard response to the Temple
Ban for African Latter-day Saints? Nobody knows? To go beyond this same response
in the current dialog is dangerous.

atl134Salt Lake City, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 12:46 p.m.

Well to some extent the need for activism is not so needed when they're now
going to broadcast the priesthood meetings as well.

Ohio-LDSNE, OH

Sept. 24, 2013 12:43 p.m.

@ Johnny Triumph,

As a man, I am sad that you do not believe you have
the same abilities to love, nurture and bless lives like women can. I certainly
do. And I have the same closeness with my children that my wife does. Nothing
that is good is dependent on gender-exclusivity. I am grateful for my god-given
role as a parent - a role I share equally with my wife.

RGBuena Vista, VA

Sept. 24, 2013 12:36 p.m.

Men and women are the same in some resoects, not the same in others. I believe
that holding the priesthood by males only is something intrinsic to the nature
of their gender, and applies not to just this mortal existence, but to
premortality and postmortality. The analogy to extending the priesthood to men
of all races does not hold. For reasons unknown, black men were denied the
priesthood for many years, but it was common knowledge that that situation would
someday end, in the millennium if not before. However, the same cannot be said
for women and the priesthood. But the priesthood cannot be used to bless
oneself, although priesthood holders are blessed by honoring it, the same as
women are blessed by honoring their covenants; and the highest blessings of the
priesthood are reserved for those who enter celestial marriage, jointly as man
and wife.

Johnny TriumphAmerican Fork, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 12:30 p.m.

This is such a shame to me. As a man I am not demanding that I experience all
the role of womanhood has to offer. I wish at times that I could have the same
abilities to love, nurture, and bless lives like women have to offer. That I
can't experience the closeness that a mother shares with her children. But
I do not expect the Prophet to petition the Lord and ask for those blessings and
abilities to be extended to me. Confusion of roles is really causing a lot of
pain, both in the world and in the Church.

@Dennis - a loving and
nurturing mother would find a way for her son to attend. Hopefully there are
other male figures in the boy's life who would watch out for him and take
him to the meeting. A loving mother would, I believe, seek to have the
influence of other Priesthood holders in her son's life so that he could
grow into a worthy Priesthood holder.

Uncle_FesterNiskayuna, NY

Sept. 24, 2013 12:29 p.m.

Gee Dennis, stop being confused it's not that hard. It's a meeting for
men, directed at men. The materials are not directed at women. Why should space
be freed so that people to whom the message is not directed may attend?

adamgaleLa Verkin, UT

Sept. 24, 2013 12:26 p.m.

@Dennis, a member of their ward or stake could easily take them to the
conference. She would still be refused service because the words aren't
for her, but for her priesthood worthy son.

DennisHarwich, MA

Sept. 24, 2013 12:22 p.m.

Isn't it interesting that the Church would keep (any) woman out of the
proceedings yet have a meeting that 12 year old boys can attend. What if a young
mans father had passed and his mother brought him to the meeting? Would she be
kicked out? Can you see the confused look on my face?